Determinants ofthe perception of sagittal motion

This study examines the change in the perceived distance of an object in three-dimensional space when the object andlor the observer’s head is moved along the line of sight (sagittal motion) as a function of the perceived absolute (egocentric) distance of the object and the perceived motion of the head. To analyze the processes involved, two situations, labeled A and B, were used in four experiments. In Situation A, the observer was stationary and the perceived motion of the object was measured as the object was moved toward and away from the observer. In Situation B, the same visual information regarding the changing perceived egocentric distance between the observer and object was provided as in Situation A, but part or all of the change in visual egocentric distance was produced by the sagittal motion of the observer’s head. A comparison of the perceived motion of the object in the two situations was used to measure the compensation in the perception of the motion of the object as a result of the headmotion. Compensation was often clearly incomplete, and errors were often made in the perception of the motion of the stimulus object. A theory is proposed, which identifies the relation between the changes in the perceived egocentric distance of the object and the tandem motion of the object resulting from the perceived motion of the head to be the significant factor in the perception of the sagittal motion of the stimulus object in Situation B.

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

[2]  Hans Wallach,et al.  A compensation for field expansion caused by moving forward , 1975 .

[3]  W C Gogel,et al.  Analysis of the perception of motion concomitant with a lateral motion of the head , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[4]  E. Reed.  The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1989 .

[5]  Chizu Kano,et al.  The Perception of Self-Motion Induced by Peripheral Visual Information in Sitting and Supine Postures , 1991 .

[6]  W C Gogel,et al.  A theory of phenomenal geometry and its applications , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[7]  Hans Wallach,et al.  Perceiving a Stable Environment , 1985 .

[8]  W. Gogel,et al.  Perceived size and motion in depth from optical expansion , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[9]  H. Wallach,et al.  The constancy of stereoscopic depth. , 1963, The American journal of psychology.

[10]  J. Gibson.  Visually controlled locomotion and visual orientation in animals. , 1998, British journal of psychology.

[11]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  An indirect measure of perceived distance from oculomotor cues , 1977 .

[12]  W C Gogel,et al.  Induced Motion as a Function of the Speed of the Inducing Object, Measured by Means of Two Methods , 1979, Perception.

[13]  J C Baird,et al.  Transformation theory of size judgment. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  H. Wallach.  Perceiving a stable environment when one moves. , 1987, Annual review of psychology.

[15]  H. Ono,et al.  Depth perception as a function of motion parallax and absolute-distance information. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  Absolute motion parallax and the specific distance tendency , 1973 .

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

[18]  WALTER C. GOGEL,et al.  Absolute motion parallax and the specific distal 1 , 1973 .

[19]  Hans Wallach,et al.  The compensation for movement-produced changes of object orientation , 1974 .

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