Manual anchoring biases in slant estimation affect matches even for near surfaces

People verbally overestimate hill slant by ~15°–25°, whereas manual estimates (e.g., palm board measures) are thought to be more accurate. The relative accuracy of palm boards has contributed to the widely cited theoretical claim that they tap into an accurate, but unconscious, motor representation of locomotor space. Recently, it was shown that a bias that stems from anchoring the hand at horizontal prior to the estimate can quantitatively account for the difference between manual and verbal estimates of hill slant. The present work extends this observation to manual estimates of near-surface slant, to test whether the bias derives from manual or visual uncertainty. As with far surfaces, strong manual anchoring effects were obtained for a large range of near-surface slants, including 45°. Moreover, correlations between participants’ manual and verbal estimates further support the conclusion that both measures are based on the same visual representation.

[1]  F. Durgin,et al.  Anchoring in action: manual estimates of slant are powerfully biased toward initial hand orientation and are correlated with verbal report. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  F. Durgin,et al.  Design, data, and theory regarding a digital hand inclinometer: a portable device for studying slant perception , 2011, Behavior research methods.

[3]  Frank H Durgin,et al.  Perceived slant of binocularly viewed large-scale surfaces: a common model from explicit and implicit measures. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[4]  Heiko Hecht,et al.  Slope estimation and viewing distance of the observer , 2014, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[5]  Frank H. Durgin,et al.  Slant perception in near space is categorically biased: Evidence for a vertical tendency , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[6]  F. Eves,et al.  The accuracy of 'haptically' measured geographical slant perception. , 2013, Acta psychologica.

[7]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty , 1982 .

[8]  Frank H Durgin,et al.  The perceptual experience of slope by foot and by finger. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  F. Durgin.  What do hands know about hills? Interpreting Taylor-Covill and Eves (2013) in context☆☆ , 2013, Acta psychologica.

[10]  Rich Gossweiler,et al.  Perceiving geographical slant , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[11]  C. S. Harris.  Adaptation to Displaced Vision: Visual, Motor, or Proprioceptive Change? , 1963, Science.

[12]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[13]  F. Durgin,et al.  Manual matching of perceived surface orientation is affected by arm posture: evidence of calibration between proprioception and visual experience in near space , 2011, Experimental Brain Research.

[14]  Bruce Bridgeman,et al.  Processing Spatial Layout by Perception and Sensorimotor Interaction , 2008, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[15]  F. Durgin,et al.  Egocentric reference frame bias in the palmar haptic perception of surface orientation , 2014, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[16]  Frank H Durgin,et al.  On the anisotropy of perceived ground extents and the interpretation of walked distance as a measure of perception. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  Tim S. Meese,et al.  A common rule for integration and suppression of luminance contrast across eyes, space, time, and pattern , 2013, i-Perception.

[18]  Frank H Durgin,et al.  Palm boards are not action measures: an alternative to the two-systems theory of geographical slant perception. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

[19]  F. Durgin,et al.  Humans have precise knowledge of familiar geographical slants. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[20]  Astrid M L Kappers,et al.  The contributions of egocentric and allocentric reference frames in haptic spatial tasks. , 2004, Acta psychologica.

[21]  Frank H Durgin,et al.  Perceptual scale expansion: an efficient angular coding strategy for locomotor space , 2011, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[22]  D. Proffitt,et al.  Visual-motor recalibration in geographical slant perception. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[23]  F. Durgin,et al.  Sugar and space? Not the case: Effects of low blood glucose on slant estimation are mediated by beliefs , 2013, i-Perception.

[24]  T. Agostini,et al.  Perception of Visual Inclination in a Real and Simulated Urban Environment , 2007, Perception.