Literature DB >> 17844964

The visual discrimination of bending.

J Farley Norman1, Elizabeth Y Wiesemann, Hideko F Norman, M Jett Taylor, Warren D Craft.   

Abstract

The sensitivity of observers to nonrigid bending was evaluated in two experiments. In both experiments, observers were required to discriminate on any given trial which of two bending rods was more elastic. In experiment 1, both rods bent within the same oriented plane, and bent either in a frontoparallel plane or bent in depth. In experiment 2, the two rods within any given trial bent in different, randomly chosen orientations in depth. The results of both experiments revealed that human observers are sensitive to, and can reliably detect, relatively small differences in bending (the average Weber fraction across experiments 1 and 2 was 9.0%). The performance of the human observers was compared to that of models that based their elasticity judgments upon either static projected curvature or mean and maximal projected speed. Despite the fact that all of the observers reported compelling 3-D perceptions of bending in depth, their judgments were both qualitatively and quantitatively consistent with the performance of the models. This similarity suggests that relatively straightforward information about the elasticity of simple bending objects is available in projected retinal images.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17844964     DOI: 10.1068/p5641

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


  6 in total

1.  Perceptual transparency from image deformation.

Authors:  Takahiro Kawabe; Kazushi Maruya; Shin'ya Nishida
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-08-03       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Visual discomfort and flicker.

Authors:  Sanae Yoshimoto; Jesel Garcia; Fang Jiang; Arnold J Wilkins; Tatsuto Takeuchi; Michael A Webster
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2017-07-21       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Form features provide a cue to the angular velocity of rotating objects.

Authors:  Christopher David Blair; Jessica Goold; Kyle Killebrew; Gideon Paul Caplovitz
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2013-06-10       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Perception of elasticity in the kinetic illusory object with phase differences in inducer motion.

Authors:  Tomohiro Masuda; Kazuki Sato; Takuma Murakoshi; Ken Utsumi; Atsushi Kimura; Nobu Shirai; So Kanazawa; Masami K Yamaguchi; Yuji Wada
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-10-25       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  The Mechanical Representation of Temporal Delays.

Authors:  Raz Leib; Amir Karniel; Ferdinando A Mussa-Ivaldi
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Perceptual judgments for the softness of materials under indentation.

Authors:  Yusuke Ujitoko; Takahiro Kawabe
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-02-02       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.