Literature DB >> 16836053

Perceptual space in the dark affected by the intrinsic bias of the visual system.

Teng Leng Ooi1, Bing Wu, Zijiang J He.   

Abstract

Correct judgment of egocentric/absolute distance in the intermediate distance range requires both the angular declination below the horizon and ground-surface information being represented accurately. This requirement can be met in the light environment but not in the dark, where the ground surface is invisible and hence cannot be represented accurately. We previously showed that a target in the dark is judged at the intersection of the projection line from the eye to the target that defines the angular declination below the horizon and an implicit surface. The implicit surface can be approximated as a slant surface with its far end slanted toward the frontoparallel plane. We hypothesize that the implicit slant surface reflects the intrinsic bias of the visual system and helps to define the perceptual space. Accordingly, we conducted two experiments in the dark to further elucidate the characteristics of the implicit slant surface. In the first experiment we measured the egocentric location of a dimly lit target on, or above, the ground, using the blind-walking-gesturing paradigm. Our results reveal that the judged target locations could be fitted by a line (surface), which indicates an intrinsic bias with a geographical slant of about 12.4 degrees. In the second experiment, with an exocentric/relative-distance task, we measured the judged ratio of aspect ratio of a fluorescent L-shaped target. Using trigonometric analysis, we found that the judged ratio of aspect ratio can be accounted for by assuming that the L-shaped target was perceived on an implicit slant surface with an average geographical slant of 14.4 degrees. That the data from the two experiments with different tasks can be fitted by implicit slant surfaces suggests that the intrinsic bias has a role in determining perceived space in the dark. The possible contribution of the intrinsic bias to representing the ground surface and its impact on space perception in the light environment are also discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16836053     DOI: 10.1068/p5492

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perception        ISSN: 0301-0066            Impact factor:   1.490


  31 in total

1.  The Effects of Age and Set Size on the Fast Extraction of Egocentric Distance.

Authors:  Daniel A Gajewski; Courtney P Wallin; John W Philbeck
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2016-01-22

2.  Perceived slant of binocularly viewed large-scale surfaces: a common model from explicit and implicit measures.

Authors:  Zhi Li; Frank H Durgin
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Inaccurate representation of the ground surface beyond a texture boundary.

Authors:  Bing Wu; Zijiang J He; Teng Leng Ooi
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 1.490

4.  Depth compression based on mis-scaling of binocular disparity may contribute to angular expansion in perceived optical slant.

Authors:  Zhi Li; Frank H Durgin
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-10-04       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Perceived relative distance on the ground affected by the selection of depth information.

Authors:  Jun Wu; Zijiang J He; Teng Leng Ooi
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2008-05

6.  Environmental surfaces and the compression of perceived visual space.

Authors:  Zheng Bian; George J Andersen
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2011-06-07       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  Differential intrinsic bias of the 3-D perceptual environment and its role in shape constancy.

Authors:  Antonio Aznar-Casanova; Matthias Sven Keil; Manuel Moreno; Hans Supèr
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-09-17       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Space perception of strabismic observers in the real world environment.

Authors:  Teng Leng Ooi; Zijiang J He
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2015-02-19       Impact factor: 4.799

9.  Angular declination and the dynamic perception of egocentric distance.

Authors:  Daniel A Gajewski; John W Philbeck; Philip W Wirtz; David Chichka
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2013-10-07       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Imagined self-motion differs from perceived self-motion: evidence from a novel continuous pointing method.

Authors:  Jennifer L Campos; Joshua H Siegle; Betty J Mohler; Heinrich H Bülthoff; Jack M Loomis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-11-11       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.