Scalar perceptions with binocular cues of distance.

Under reduced conditions of observation, the perception of egocentric distance is determined by a composite of the tendency to see objects as near (the specific-distance tendency) and residual oculomotor cues of distance. The resulting perceived distance-the egocentric reference distance-was found to affect the perceived relative depth produced by binocular disparity between two points of light: the more distant light was positioned in apparent depth near the egocentric reference distance, with the scalar perception of the depth between the lights related to the magnitude of the reference distance. Implications for the scaling of relational perceptions are discussed.

[1]  William Epstein,et al.  Size and distance judgments under reduced conditions of viewing , 1969 .

[2]  W. Gogel,et al.  Depth adjacency in simultaneous contrast , 1969 .

[3]  W C GOGEL,et al.  The visual perception of size and distance. , 1962, [Report]. Civil Aeromedical Research Institute.

[4]  J M Foley,et al.  Binocular disparity and perceived relative distance: an examination of two hypotheses. , 1967, Vision research.

[5]  W C Gogel,et al.  The Effect of Object Familiarity on the Perception of Size and Distance , 1969, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[6]  W C GOGEL,et al.  Convergence as a cue to the perceived distance of objects in a binocular configuration. , 1961, Report. Army Medical Research Laboratory.

[7]  Whitman Richards,et al.  Convergence as a cue to depth , 1969 .

[8]  Jacob Nachmias,et al.  The Effect of Oculomotor Adjustments on Apparent Size , 1959 .

[9]  W C GOGEL,et al.  PERCEPTION OF DEPTH FROM BINOCULAR DISPARITY. , 1964, Journal of experimental psychology.

[10]  David R. Olson,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF INSTRUCTION , 1970 .

[11]  G Peters,et al.  Monocular and binocular estimations of distance when knowledge of the relevant space is absent. , 1970, The Journal of psychology.

[12]  Schiffman Hr.  Size-estimation of familiar objects under informative and reduced conditions of viewing. , 1967 .

[13]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  Perception of off-sized objects1 , 1969 .

[14]  W C Gogel,et al.  The sensing of retinal size. , 1969, Vision research.

[15]  S. Fillenbaum,et al.  PERCEPTION OF OFF-SIZE VERSIONS OF A FAMILIAR OBJECT UNDER CONDITIONS OF RICH INFORMATION. , 1965, Journal of experimental psychology.

[16]  W. R. Biersdorf,et al.  The effect of instructions and oculomotor adjustments on apparent size. , 1963, The American journal of psychology.

[17]  W R Biersdorf,et al.  Convergence and apparent distance as correlates of size judgments at near distances. , 1966, The Journal of general psychology.

[18]  W C Gogel.  The absolute and relative size cues to distance. , 1969, The American journal of psychology.

[19]  J. M. Foley.  Depth, size and distance in stereoscopic vision , 1968 .

[20]  H W Mertens,et al.  Perceived Size and Distance of Familiar Objects , 1967, Perceptual and motor skills.

[21]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  The Effect of Convergence on Perceived Size and Distance , 1962 .

[22]  W C GOGEL,et al.  Convergence as a cue to absolute distance. , 1961, Report. Army Medical Research Laboratory.

[23]  R. Kinchla.  Visual movement perception: A comparison of absolute and relative movement discrimination , 1971 .

[24]  Gogel Wc,et al.  The measurement of perceived size and distance. , 1968 .

[25]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  The retinal size of a familiar object as a determiner of apparent distance. , 1957 .