Eye on the Illusion

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Ambiguous images seem to flicker between two alternatives, as if the brain cannot quite make up its mind how to perceive them. The Necker cube, for instance, sometimes looks as if it is pointing into the page and sometimes appears to point out. In an experiment on six volunteers with different kinds of ambiguous visual and auditory stimuli, Christof Koch of the California Institute of Technology and his colleagues found that the pupils dilated around the time that perception shifted. The extent of the momentary dilation, which could be as much as one millimeter, also correlated with how long that particular perception lasted. (Pupils span about two millimeters under bright light.) Because the neurotransmitter norepinephrine controls the pupils, the compound may also play a role in rapid, unconscious decision making. Take a look at the study in the February 5 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA.

Philip Yam is the managing editor of ScientificAmerican.com, responsible for the overall news content online. He began working at the magazine in 1989, first as a copyeditor and then as a features editor specializing in physics. He is the author of The Pathological Protein: Mad Cow, Chronic Wasting and Other Prion Diseases.

More by Philip Yam
Scientific American Magazine Vol 298 Issue 4This article was published with the title “Eye on the Illusion” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 298 No. 4 (), p. 36
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0408-36b

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe