Literature DB >> 21735313

The underestimation of egocentric distance: evidence from frontal matching tasks.

Zhi Li1, John Phillips, Frank H Durgin.   

Abstract

There is controversy over the existence, nature, and cause of error in egocentric distance judgments. One proposal is that the systematic biases often found in explicit judgments of egocentric distance along the ground may be related to recently observed biases in the perceived declination of gaze (Durgin & Li, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, in press), To measure perceived egocentric distance nonverbally, observers in a field were asked to position themselves so that their distance from one of two experimenters was equal to the frontal distance between the experimenters. Observers placed themselves too far away, consistent with egocentric distance underestimation. A similar experiment was conducted with vertical frontal extents. Both experiments were replicated in panoramic virtual reality. Perceived egocentric distance was quantitatively consistent with angular bias in perceived gaze declination (1.5 gain). Finally, an exocentric distance-matching task was contrasted with a variant of the egocentric matching task. The egocentric matching data approximate a constant compression of perceived egocentric distance with a power function exponent of nearly 1; exocentric matches had an exponent of about 0.67. The divergent pattern between egocentric and exocentric matches suggests that they depend on different visual cues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21735313      PMCID: PMC3205207          DOI: 10.3758/s13414-011-0170-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  41 in total

1.  Distance judgment by the method of fractionation.

Authors:  J PURDY; E J GIBSON
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1955-12

2.  Dissociation between visual perception of allocentric distance and visually directed walking of its extent.

Authors:  Nobuo Kudoh
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 1.490

3.  The perception of distances and spatial relationships in natural outdoor environments.

Authors:  J Farley Norman; Charles E Crabtree; Anna Marie Clayton; Hideko F Norman
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 1.490

4.  Using verbal and blind-walking distance estimates to investigate the two visual systems hypothesis.

Authors:  Jeffrey Andre; Sheena Rogers
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2006-04

5.  Environmental context influences visually perceived distance.

Authors:  Joseph S Lappin; Amy L Shelton; John J Rieser
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2006-05

6.  Judgments of visually perceived eye level (VPEL) in outdoor scenes: effects of slope and height.

Authors:  Robert P O'Shea; Helen E Ross
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 1.490

7.  Seeing beyond the target: environmental context affects distance perception.

Authors:  Jessica K Witt; Jeanine K Stefanucci; Cedar R Riener; Dennis R Proffitt
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 1.490

8.  A distance judgment function based on space perception mechanisms: revisiting Gilinsky's (1951) equation.

Authors:  Teng Leng Ooi; Zijiang J He
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  The perceived slant of visual surfaces-optical and geographical.

Authors:  J J GIBSON; J CORNSWEET
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1952-07

10.  Progressive locomotor recalibration during blind walking.

Authors:  John W Philbeck; Adam J Woods; Joeanna Arthur; Jennifer Todd
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2008-11
View more
  22 in total

1.  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

2.  Does perceived angular declination contribute to perceived optical slant on level ground?

Authors:  Zhi Li; Frank H Durgin
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  The social psychology of perception experiments: hills, backpacks, glucose, and the problem of generalizability.

Authors:  Frank H Durgin; Brennan Klein; Ariana Spiegel; Cassandra J Strawser; Morgan Williams
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-03-19       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  A large-scale horizontal-vertical illusion produced with small objects separated in depth.

Authors:  Zhi Li; Frank H Durgin
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Aging and the perception of egocentric distance.

Authors:  Zheng Bian; George J Andersen
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2012-12-31

6.  Manual matching of perceived surface orientation is affected by arm posture: evidence of calibration between proprioception and visual experience in near space.

Authors:  Zhi Li; Frank H Durgin
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-11-16       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Perceptual scale expansion: an efficient angular coding strategy for locomotor space.

Authors:  Frank H Durgin; Zhi Li
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  On the anisotropy of perceived ground extents and the interpretation of walked distance as a measure of perception.

Authors:  Zhi Li; Emily Sun; Cassandra J Strawser; Ariana Spiegel; Brennan Klein; Frank H Durgin
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-08-13       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Large perceptual distortions of locomotor action space occur in ground-based coordinates: Angular expansion and the large-scale horizontal-vertical illusion.

Authors:  Brennan J Klein; Zhi Li; Frank H Durgin
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Gestalt-like constraints produce veridical (Euclidean) percepts of 3D indoor scenes.

Authors:  TaeKyu Kwon; Yunfeng Li; Tadamasa Sawada; Zygmunt Pizlo
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2015-11-03       Impact factor: 1.886

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.