It is argued that since reversals might have often occurred during “figure-off” intervals, the theory of “satiation of orientation” proposed by Orbach, Ehrlich, and Heath (1963) might be inadequate for explaining their data on the rate of reversals of the Necker cube.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
KolersP. A.Apparent movement of a Necker cube. American Journal of Psychology, 1964, 77, 220–230.
2.
OrbachJ.EhrlichD., & HeathH. A.Reversibility of the Necker cube: I. An examination of the concept of “satiation of orientation.”Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1963, 17, 439–458.
3.
OrbachJ.ZuckerE., & OlsonR.Reversibility of the Necker cube: VII. Reversal rate as a function of figure-on and figure-off durations. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1966, 22, 615–618.
4.
SolleyC. M., & MurphyG.Development of the perceptual world. New York: Basic Books, 1960.
