Ponzo is a familiar name in psychology because of the illusion that takes his name. He had a long and productive career in Italy, and some of his work was translated for international journals already in his lifetime. However, few of these papers are available in English. We provide a commentary that considers how his name came to be associated with an illusion he did not discover. We explain the content of several papers, some of which are often cited in a wrong context in the literature (i.e., papers on touch mentioned in relation to the Ponzo illusion). More importantly, we discuss his contribution to the study of perceived numerosity, and provide a full translation of his important 1928 paper, including a redrawing of its 28 illustrations.
AllikJ.TuulmetsT. (1991). Occupancy model of perceived numerosity. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 49, 303–314. https://doi.org/10/c3jzhn
3.
AnobileG.CicchiniG. M.BurrD. C. (2014). Separate mechanisms for perception of numerosity and density. Psychological Science, 25, 265–270. https://doi.org/10/f5pfdk
4.
AnobileG.CicchiniG. M.PomèA.BurrD. C. (2017). Connecting visual objects reduces perceived numerosity and density for sparse but not dense patterns. Journal of Numerical Cognition, 3, 133–146. https://doi.org/10.5964/jnc.v3i2.38
5.
AraiH.AraiS. (2013). Tracing the history of Ponzo illusions. Technical Reports of the Mathematical Vision Science Laboratory, Tokyo, Japan. No.5 July 29:1–10.
6.
BenedettiF. (1985). Processing of tactile spatial information with crossed fingers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.11.4.517
7.
BertaminiM. (2017). Programming visual illusions for everyone (Vol. 2). Springer.
8.
BertaminiM.GuestM.ContemoriG.ZitoM. (2023). What the Solitaire illusion tells us about perception of numerosity. British Journal of Psychology, 114, 393–414. httpsss://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12627
9.
BertaminiM.ZitoM.Scott-SamuelN. E.HullemanJ. (2016). Spatial clustering and its effect on perceived clustering, numerosity and dispersion. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 78, 1460–1471. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-016-1100-0
CretenoudA. F.BarakatA.MillietA.ChoungO.-H.BertaminiM.ConstantinC.HerzogM. H. (2021). How do visual skills relate to action video game performance?Journal of Vision, 21, 10. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.21.7.10
14.
CretenoudA. F.GrzeczkowskiL.BertaminiM.HerzogM. H. (2020). Individual differences in the Müller-Lyer and Ponzo illusions are stable across different contexts. Journal of Vision, 20, 4. https://doi.org/10/gh5mhf
15.
DakinS. C.TibberM. S.GreenwoodJ. A.MorganM. J. (2011). A common visual metric for approximate number and density. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 19552–19557. https://doi.org/10/fr6zkm
16.
DayR. H.KimmA. C. (2010). Analysis and explanation of the thiéry–Wundt Illusion. Perception, 39, 942–952. https://doi.org/10.1068/p6494
17.
DehaeneS. (1992). Varieties of numerical abilities. Cognition, 44, 1–42.
18.
De MarchiS. (1929). Le valutazioni numeriche di collettività. [Numerical judgments of quantities]. Archivio Italiano di Psicologia, 7, 177–225.
DurginF. H. (2008). Texture density adaptation and visual number revisited. Current Biology, 18, R855–856. https://doi.org/10/fvcqs6
23.
FisherG. H. (1969). Towards a new explanation for the geometrical illusions: I. The properties of contours which induce illusory distortion. British Journal of Psychology, 60, 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1969.tb01190.x
24.
FranconeriS. L.BemisD. K.AlvarezG. A. (2009). Number estimation relies on a set of segmented objects. Cognition, 113, 1–13. https://doi.org/10/d6rxv4
25.
FrithC. D.FrithU. (1972). The solitaire illusion: An illusion of numerosity. Perception & Psychophysics, 11, 409–410. https://doi.org/10/bbmhn4
26.
GinsburgN. (1976). Effect of item arrangement on perceived numerosity: Randomness vs regularity. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 43, 663–668. https://doi.org/10/cjjwbm.
PonzoM. (1910). Intorno ad alcune illusioni nel campo delle sensazioni tattili, sull’illusione di Aristotele e fenomeni analoghi. Archiv für die Gesamte Psychologie, 16, 307–345.
32.
PonzoM. (1911). Sur quelques illusions dans le champ des sensations tactiles. Sur l’illusion d’Aristote et phénomènes analogues. [On some illusions in the field of tactile sensations. On Aristotle's illusion and analogous phenomena]. Archives Italiennes de Biologie, 20–34.
33.
PonzoM. (1912a). Rapports entre quelques illusions visuelles de contraste angulaire et l’appréciation de grandeur des astres à l’horizon. [Relationship between some visual illusions of angular contrast and the appreciation of the size of the stars on the horizon]. Archives Italiennes de Biologie, 58, 327–329.
34.
PonzoM. (1912b). Rapporti fra alcune illusioni visive di contrasto angolare e l’apprezzamento di grandezza degli astri all’orizzontale. Rivista di Psicologia, 8, 304–306.
35.
PonzoM. (1928). Urteilstäuschungen über Mengen. [Judgement illusions about quantities]. Archiv für die Gesamte Psychologie, 65, 129–162.
36.
PonzoM. (1929). Illusioni negli apprezzamenti di collettività. [Judgement illusions about quantities]. Archivio Italiano di Psicologia, 7, 1–37.
37.
PoomL.LindskogM.WinmanA.van den BergR. (2019). Grouping effects in numerosity perception under prolonged viewing conditions. PLOS ONE, 14, e0207502. https://doi.org/10/gfzdxc
38.
RaphaelS.DillenburgerB.MorganM. (2013). Computation of relative numerosity of circular dot textures. Journal of Vision, 13, 17.
39.
RobinsonJ. O. (1972). The psychology of visual illusion. Hutchinson.
40.
RuganiR.FontanariL.SimoniE.RegolinL.VallortigaraG. (2009). Arithmetic in newborn chicks. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276, 2451–2460. https://doi.org/10/dwm8mp
41.
SanfordE. C. (1898). A Course in experimental psychology. Part 1: Sensation and perception (2nd ed.). Heath.
42.
SanfordE. C. (1900). Cours de psychologie expérimentale. [A course in experimental psychology.] Schleicher.
43.
ShapiroA.TodorovićD. (2017). The Oxford compendium of visual illusions. Oxford University Press.
TokitaM.IshiguchiA. (2010). How might the discrepancy in the effects of perceptual variables on numerosity judgment be reconciled?Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 72, 1839–1853. https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.7.1839
47.
VicarioG. B. (2008). Optical-geometrical illusions: The nomenclature. Gestalt Theory, 30, 168–180.
48.
VicarioG. B. (2011). Illusioni ottico-geometriche. Una rassegna di problemi. [Optocal-geometric illusions. A review of problems.] Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arte.
49.
von BezoldW. (1884). Eine perspectivische Täuschung. [An illusion of perspective]. Annalen der Physik und Chemie, 23, 351–352.
50.
VosP. G.Van OeffelenM. P.TiboschH. J.AllikJ. (1988). Interactions between area and numerosity. Psychological Research, 50, 148–154. https://doi.org/10/fhnn8m
WadeN. J. (2022). Mario Ponzo and the age of visual illusions. In SandroneS.LorussoL. (Eds.), The birth of modern neuroscience in turin (pp. 197–209). Oxford University Press.
54.
YildizG. Y.SperandioI.KettleC.ChouinardP. A. (2022). A review on various explanations of Ponzo-like illusions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 29, 293–320. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-021-02007-7
