Critical Roles for Distance, Task, and Motion in Space Perception: Initial Conceptual Framework and Practical Implications

Objective: A conceptual framework of visual space perception is proposed. Background: Prior studies suggest that the processes underlying space perception depend on viewing distance, the nature of a task, and the presence and nature of motion. Method: Evidence from neuropsychological, neuroimaging, and behavioral studies is reviewed. Results: A preliminary conceptual framework of space perception is proposed in which three critical factors of distance, task, and motion represent different dimensions. Different locations within the framework represent the involvement of different underlying processes. At one extreme, indirect perception underlies a stationary observer's perceptual judgments of stationary objects in far space. At the other extreme, direct perception underlies a moving observer's actions involving moving objects in near space. Between these extremes, both processes are utilized and allow for flexibility in human performance. Conclusions: Prior studies of space perception should be reevaluated based on viewing distances employed, the nature of the tasks, and the presence and nature of motion. Future studies of space perception should manipulate these variables. Application: If, as proposed by the framework, observers use different underlying mechanisms to perceive near and far spaces and to perform different types of tasks, it becomes important to identify the limits of such mechanisms and to design technologies to accommodate those limits. For example, collision-avoidance warning systems may have to utilize different criteria for providing warnings at near versus far headways. Further study of the proposed framework will help improve the design of such technologies.

[1]  A. S. Gilinsky Perceived size and distance in visual space. , 1951, Psychological review.

[2]  F. Previc The neuropsychology of 3-D space. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  B. Bridgeman,et al.  Relation between cognitive and motor-oriented systems of visual position perception. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  F. Ferlazzo,et al.  Opposite visual field asymmetries for egocentric and allocentric spatial judgments , 2004, Neuroreport.

[5]  J. Marshall,et al.  Left neglect for near but not far space in man , 1991, Nature.

[6]  L. Jakobson,et al.  A neurological dissociation between perceiving objects and grasping them , 1991, Nature.

[7]  A. Berti,et al.  When Far Becomes Near: Remapping of Space by Tool Use , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[8]  J. Yolton Reasons for Realism. Selected Essays of James J. Gibson. Edited by EDWARD REED and REBECCA JONES. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1982. Pp. xvi + 449. $39.95 , 1984 .

[9]  David N. Lee,et al.  A Theory of Visual Control of Braking Based on Information about Time-to-Collision , 1976, Perception.

[10]  B. Bridgeman,et al.  Segregation of cognitive and motor aspects of visual function using induced motion , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[11]  M. Goodale,et al.  The visual brain in action , 1995 .

[12]  C. Trevarthen,et al.  Two mechanisms of vision in primates , 1968, Psychologische Forschung.

[13]  Patricia R. DeLucia,et al.  The Aperture Illusion can Occur with “3-D” Displays and Active Control: Implications for Minimally-Invasive Surgery , 2006 .

[14]  J. Gibson Observations on active touch. , 1962, Psychological review.

[15]  J. Cutting,et al.  Minimodularity and the perception of layout. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[16]  Patricia R. DeLucia,et al.  Chapter 11 Multiple sources of information influence time-to-contact judgments: Do heuristics accommodate limits in sensory and cognitive processes? , 2004 .

[17]  Sunanda Mitra,et al.  Toward the Improvement of Image-Guided Interventions for Minimally Invasive Surgery: Three Factors That Affect Performance , 2006, Hum. Factors.

[18]  M. Goodale,et al.  Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand , 1995, Current Biology.

[19]  P R DeLucia,et al.  Pictorial and motion-based information for depth perception. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Action for perception: a motor-visual attentional effect. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  Leslie G. Ungerleider Two cortical visual systems , 1982 .

[22]  Zhonghai Li,et al.  An empirical investigation of a dynamic brake light concept for reduction of rear-end collisions through manipulation of optical looming , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[23]  Nicola Smania,et al.  Coding of Far and Near Space in Neglect Patients , 2001, NeuroImage.

[24]  Patricia R. DeLucia,et al.  Visual Information in Judgments of Head-On Collisions , 2007 .

[25]  L. Jakobson,et al.  Differences in the visual control of pantomimed and natural grasping movements , 1994, Neuropsychologia.

[26]  J. Norman Are the direct and indirect theories of perception incompatible? , 1983, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[27]  K. Zilles,et al.  Neural consequences of acting in near versus far space: a physiological basis for clinical dissociations. , 2000, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[28]  Scott M. Dittman,et al.  Monocular optical constraints on collision control. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  J. Aloimonos,et al.  On the kinetic depth effect , 1989, Biological Cybernetics.

[30]  E. Reed,et al.  Reasons For Realism: Selected Essays Of James J. Gibson , 1982 .

[31]  Fred H. Previc,et al.  The Neuropsychology of 3-D Space , 1998 .

[32]  I. Gordon Theories of Visual Perception , 1989 .

[33]  S Krafczyk,et al.  OBJECT‐MOTION DETECTION AFFECTED BY CONCURRENT SELF‐MOTION PERCEPTION: APPLIED ASPECTS FOR VEHICLE GUIDANCE , 1987, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[34]  G J Andersen,et al.  Active control in interrupted dynamic spatial orientation: The detection of orientation change , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[35]  J. Tresilian,et al.  Perceptual and cognitive processes in time-to-contact estimation: Analysis of prediction-motion and relative judgment tasks , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[36]  P J Stappers,et al.  Forms Can Be Recognized from Dynamic Occlusion Alone , 1989, Perceptual and motor skills.

[37]  Bruce Bridgeman,et al.  The induced Roelofs effect: two visual systems or the shift of a single reference frame? , 2004, Vision Research.

[38]  M. Lévesque Perception , 1986, The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine.

[39]  W Schiff,et al.  Information Used in Judging Impending Collision , 1979, Perception.

[40]  Patricia R. DeLucia,et al.  Time-to-Collision Judgments of Constant and Non-Constant Velocities: Implications for Rear-End Collisions , 2006 .

[41]  Patricia R. DeLucia Effective information for TTC judgments varies during an approach event , 2010 .

[42]  M. Goodale,et al.  Active manual control of object views facilitates visual recognition , 1999, Current Biology.

[43]  Gereon R. Fink,et al.  Spatial Cognition: Where We Were and Where We Are , 2001, NeuroImage.

[44]  P R DeLucia,et al.  Cognitive motion extrapolation and cognitive clocking in prediction motion task. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[45]  M. Alexander,et al.  Principles of Neural Science , 1981 .

[46]  S. Schultz Principles of Neural Science, 4th ed. , 2001 .

[47]  J. Gibson The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1979 .

[48]  P R DeLucia,et al.  Pictorial and motion-based depth information during active control of self-motion: size-arrival effects on collision avoidance. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[49]  D. Regan,et al.  Simulated self-motion alters perceived time to collision , 2000, Current Biology.

[50]  M. Goodale,et al.  Separate visual pathways for perception and action , 1992, Trends in Neurosciences.

[51]  James E. Cutting,et al.  Chapter 3 – Perceiving Layout and Knowing Distances: The Integration, Relative Potency, and Contextual Use of Different Information about Depth* , 1995 .

[52]  M. Goodale,et al.  Sight Unseen: An Exploration of Conscious and Unconscious Vision , 2004 .

[53]  Patricia R. DeLucia,et al.  Effects of Optical Flow and Discrete Warnings on Deceleration Detection during Car Following , 2005 .

[54]  Julian Hochberg,et al.  Representation of motion and space in video and cinematic displays , 1986 .

[55]  Beryl Hesketh,et al.  A Comparison of Time Estimations in Driving With Target-Only in Motion, Self-Only in Motion, and Self-and-Target in Motion , 2002 .

[56]  N. Anderson Chapter 8 – ALGEBRAIC MODELS IN PERCEPTION* , 1974 .

[57]  Qingfeng Huang,et al.  An adaptive peer-to-peer collision warning system , 2002, Vehicular Technology Conference. IEEE 55th Vehicular Technology Conference. VTC Spring 2002 (Cat. No.02CH37367).