Sensory illusions before and after vision

Sometimes the brain gets it all wrong. It misinterprets the information from one or more of the senses. This phenomenon is commonly known as sensory illusions.

Revisiting S.B., who regained his eyesight after more than 50 years of being blind. Using vision, he now recognised simple shapes and ordinary objects as well as their size. But he closed his eyes in traffic. Perhaps more complex visual information overwhelmed him. Perhaps it did not match his memories from when he was still blind. Or perhaps both. (See our blog for the scientific approach, Vision, haptic touch, and hearing and Sensory mismatch.) A related issue is that of conflicting information within and between the senses. Did S.B. show an effect on sensory illusions based on or including visual information?

When S.B. was still blind, he would have been familiar with both tactile and auditory illusions.

But what about visual illusions?

Visual experience is not necessary to show an effect on all visual illusions1. Indeed, S.B. would have encountered some of them when he was still blind. Simply because certain illusions are both visual and tactile. And S.B. would, therefore, have shown an effect on these illusions immediately after he had started using vision. For example, on the Müller-Lyer Illusion2,3.

Visual illusion: 2 lines of equal length appear unequal when the ends have arrow shapes attached.
(Müller-Lyer Illusion, retrieved from elevers.us)

The Müller-Lyer Illusion consist of two horizontal lines that are identical in length: one with inwards-pointing and one with outward-pointing fins. People who show an effect on this illusion, perceive the line with the outwards-pointing fins as longer than the other line. The Müller-Lyer Illusion is found both in people who are born fully sighted and in people who are born blind. As well as in children (born with very low or no vision; 8–16 years old) after only 48 hours of seeing4. But this was not the case for S.B., who regained his eyesight at the age of 525.

S.B. showed a very weak effect on the visual Müller-Lyer Illusion.

For other visual illusions, visual experience is sometimes necessary and sometimes not. An example is the Ponzo Illusion. The Ponzo Illusion consists of two parallel lines that are converging. These two lines are crossed by several horizontal lines that are identical in length. Almost like a railway track that disappears into the distance. People who show the Ponzo Illusion perceive the crossing lines as becoming shorter and shorter the more the vertical lines converge.

Visual Illusion, perspective of the train tracks makes the 2 yellow lines appear different sizes
(Ponzo Illusion, retrieved from illusionsindex.org)

The Ponzo Illusion does not show and effect in people who rely on their sense of touch. And prior visual experience does not change that6. This illusion is not tactile. At the same time, the visual Ponzo Illusion is found in children (born with very low or no vision; 8–16 years old) after only 48 hours of seeing4. The illusion is visual, but prior visual experience is not necessary. In a parallel vein, the Ponzo Illusion has been translated into an auditory format. This auditory version of the illusion occurs in people who are fully sighed and wearing a blindfold. But not in people who have been blind since before they were 20 months old7. The Ponzo Illusion is not auditory without prior visual experience. S.B. who had been visually impaired from before he was two years old should, therefore, have shown an effect on the visual Ponzo Illusion immediately after he had regained vision. Or on a similar illusion.

Visual illusion using perspective to make figures appear larger.
(retrieved from richardgregory.org)

Instead of judging the length of two lines as in the Ponzo Illusion, S.B. was asked to describe the relative sizes of four men. People who have been fully sighted since birth typically perceive the men as increasing in height. S.B. described: “They don’t look far away, it’s just as though the men were standing underneath (? the buildings). The first man looks smaller, but the last three look the same.” 5 S.B. showed a very weak effect on the visual Perspective Size Changes Illusion. (Gregory & Wallace, 1969, p. 22)

After having regained vision, S.B. would also encounter multisensory illusions that include visual information. These illusions consist of conflicting information from vision, touch, hearing, smell, and/or taste. The brain now has to decide how to deal with this. It most often turns to previous learning. An alternative would be to ignore the visual information. Indeed, multisensory illusions that include visual information do not exist without vision. And also not if the visual information is not associated with the other sensory information in a certain way, for example, the lip movements and the sound of spoken words. Prior visual experience is necessary.

Immediately after having regained vision, S.B. would not show an effect on multisensory illusions that included visual information. But his susceptibility to them would probably increase as he learnt to associate and integrate visual information with other sensory information. (See our blog for Crossmodal correspondences between the senses and Multisensory processing.) That is, if he did not close his eyes.

Now, challenge your senses.

Tactile illusions:

 

Auditory illusions:

 

Visual illusions:

 

See our blog for Activities; especially 65-67.

Blog post author: Dr Torø Graven


 

1. Bean, C H (1938) The blind have “optical illusions.” Journal of Experimental Psychology, 22(3), 283–289. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061244

2. Heller, M A, … [et al.] (2002). The haptic Müller-Lyer illusion in sighted and blind people. Perception, 31(10), 1263-1274. https://doi.org/10.1068/p3340

3. Millar, S, & Al-Attar, Z (2002) The Müller-Lyer illusion in touch and vision: Implications for multisensory processes. Perception & Psychophysics 64(April), 353–365. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194709

4. Gandhi, T, Kali, A, Ganesh, S, & Sinha, P (2016) Immediate susceptibility to visual illusions after sight onset. Current Biology, 25(9), R358-R359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.03.005

5. Gregory, R L, & Wallace, J G (1969) Recovery from Early Blindness A Case Study. Experimental Psychology Society Monograph, No. 2. https://www.richardgregory.org/papers/recovery_blind/recovery-from-early-blindness.pdf

6. Heller, M A, & Ballesteros, S (2012) Visually-impaired touch. Scholarpedia, 7(11), 8240. http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Visually-impaired_touch

7. Renier, L, …  [et al.] (2005) The Ponzo Illusion with Auditory Substitution of Vision in Sighted and Early-Blind Subjects. Perception34(7), 857-867. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5219

Touching the Future: Exploring Haptics and Multisensory Experiences in Virtual Reality

In real life environments, the brain associates and transfers information, crossmodally, from one sense to another. It integrates and processes information from multiple senses. And emotional perceptions too. (See our blog for the crossmodal correspondences between the senses, crossmodal brain plasticity, multisensory processing, and emmotional perceptions). But what happens in Virtual Realities? Virtual Realities are created to trick us into believing something is real when it is not. They can be all visual, auditory, or tactile – and even multisensory


I have invited Associate Professor Mounia Ziat, Bentley University to write about the sense of touch in multisensory virtual realities. That is, on haptic technologies that simulate the tactile and kinaesthetic sensations we feel when interacting with the real world. Mounia Ziat has published extensively on perception and human interaction with natural and artificial environments. And, she has been awarded numerous prizes and grants for her work (e.g., from the EuroHaptics Society, National Science Foundation,  America’s Seed Fund, and Google Research). In this blog post, Mounia explores the transformative potential of haptics in virtual reality, with applications that enrich accessibility, emotional well-being, rehabilitation, and sensory understanding.


The sense of touch, including its interplay with other sensory modalities, is essential to how we experience and navigate the world. In virtual reality (VR), haptic technologies are unlocking new dimensions of sensory engagement, from emotional resonance to crossmodal integration with temperature, sound, and vision.


Multisensory Integration: The Role of Touch and Temperature

Touch and temperature are deeply intertwined in our perception of the world. Studies on the hue-heat hypothesis, for instance, show how color can influence temperature perception: blue hues can make hot objects feel cooler, while red hues can intensify the sensation of cold​. These crossmodal interactions highlight the importance of synchronizing sensory inputs for a coherent and meaningful experience. In VR, combining haptics with temperature modulation can create more immersive and realistic interactions. For example, a VR system could use haptic feedback and visual cues to replicate the warmth of a sunny beach or the chill of a snowstorm, enhancing the user’s sense of presence.


Haptics in Emotional and Interpersonal Experiences

Touch isn’t just functional—it’s deeply emotional. Haptic sensations in VR can evoke feelings of comfort, fear, or excitement, depending on how they are designed. Research on the cutaneous rabbit illusion, where participants feel “hops” on their arm, shows how tactile feedback can influence emotions like arousal and valence.


Wearable haptic systems, such as gloves, smart clothing, and vests, are being developed to provide tactile feedback that carries emotional meaning. These devices can simulate caresses, tickling sensations, or even the comforting pressure of a hug, paving the way for emotionally expressive communication in virtual and augmented realities.


However, existing haptic stimuli often lack the ability to fully capture the emotional nuances of real-world touch. To unlock the full potential of haptics, researchers should design stimuli that evoke emotions, identify socially acceptable touchpoints, and improve the integration of tactile feedback into eXtended Reality (XR) systems. These advancements could transform how people connect and communicate, especially in mediated or virtual environments.


Applications Across Fields

Haptics is already making waves across diverse fields:

  • Healthcare and Rehabilitation: Haptic feedback in VR has been instrumental in neurorehabilitation for individuals with upper limb paralysis. Devices like robotic exoskeletons and haptic gloves provide tactile stimulation during therapy, promoting motor and sensory recovery while engaging patients in interactive exercises. These technologies not only improve physical outcomes but also enhance patient motivation by integrating gamified elements into therapy. Mid-air Haptics has similarly been used to reduce anxiety during medical procedures, demonstrating the versatility of haptic technology in healthcare.
  • Art and Immersion: In artistic VR installations, passive haptics—like vibrations underfoot when “walking” on virtual paintings—can be paired with temperature shifts to simulate the feel of stepping on different materials.
  • Accessibility: For individuals with sensory challenges, haptics can provide more nuanced and informative feedback, bridging gaps in sensory perception.

These applications demonstrate how haptics can enrich both functional and creative experiences.


Future Challenges and Opportunities

As promising as haptic technology is, challenges remain. Designing devices that seamlessly integrate touch feedback is technically complex. Moreover, creating socially acceptable and emotionally expressive tactile stimuli requires careful consideration of cultural and personal differences. Future research will likely explore these intersections, advancing haptic systems that are not only precise and realistic but also adaptable and inclusive.


Conclusion

Haptics is at the frontier of sensory innovation, transforming virtual reality into a multisensory experience that engages touch, vision, audition, and emotion. By harnessing these technologies, we can create inclusive, immersive environments that redefine how we interact with both the virtual and physical worlds.


As we move forward, the integration of haptics in neurorehabilitation, art, and accessibility offers exciting possibilities—not just for technology, but for human connection and understanding.


See our blog for Activities; especially 55-57.


Some suggestions for further listening and watching

Emergence Gallery: Virtual Walking

Haptic gloves help blind people ‘see’ art

Is That my Real Hand?

Smart Clothing

The Predictive Perception of Dynamic Vibrotactile Stimuli Applied to the Fingertip

The VR Dilemma: How AR and VR redefine our reality

Understanding Affective Touch for Better VR Experience

Virtual reality: how technology can help amputees

Virtual Reality Used To Treat Mental Health Problems


And reading

Haptics for Human-Computer Interaction: From the Skin to the Brain

Interpersonal Haptic Communication: Review and Directions for the Future

The Effect of Multimodal Virtual Reality Experience on the Emotional Responses Related to Injections

Walking on Paintings: Assessment of passive haptic feedback to enhance the immersive experience

What the Mind Can Comprehend from a Single Touch