A theory of phenomenal geometry and its applications

The geometry of perceived space (phenomenal geometry) is specified in terms of three basic factors: the perception of direction, the perception of distance or depth, and the perception of the observer’s own position or motion. The apparent spatial locations of stimulus points resulting from these three factors thereupon determine the derived perceptions of size, orientation, shape, and motion. Phenomenal geometry is expected to apply to both veridical and illusory perceptions. It is applied here to explain a number of representative illusions, including the illusory rotation of an inverted mask (Gregory, 1970), a trapezoidal window (Ames, 1952), and any single or multiple point stimuli in which errors in one or more of the three basic factors are present. It is concluded from phenomenal geometry that the size-distance and motion-distance invariance hypotheses are special cases of the head motion paradigm, and that proposed explanations in terms of compensation, expectation, or logical processes often are unnecessary for predicting responses to single or multiple stimuli involving head or stimulus motion. Two hypotheses are identified in applying phenomenal geometry. It is assumed that the perceptual localization of stimulus points determines the same derived perceptions, regardless of the source of perceptual information supporting the localizations. This assumption of cue equivalence or cue substitution provides considerable parsimony to the geometry. Also, it is assumed that the perceptions specified by the geometry are internally consistent. Departures from this internal consistency, such as those which occur in the size-distance paradox, are considered to often reflect the intrusion of nonperceptual (cognitive) processes into the responses. Some theoretical implications of this analysis of phenomenal geometry are discussed.

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

[2]  Hiroshi Ono,et al.  Oculomotor adjustments and size-distance perception , 1974 .

[3]  R. Gregory.  The intelligent eye , 1970 .

[4]  London,et al.  The Ames Demonstrations in Perception , 1953 .

[5]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  A two-process theory of the response to size and distance , 1987, Perception & Psychophysics.

[6]  J E Cutting,et al.  Affine distortions of pictorial space: some predictions for Goldstein (1987) that La Gournerie (1859) might have made. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  J M Foley,et al.  The size-distance relation and intrinsic geometry of visual space: implications for processing. , 1972, Vision research.

[8]  T. J. Sharkey,et al.  Measuring Attention Using Induced Motion , 1989, Perception.

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

[10]  William Epstein,et al.  Automatic and attentional components in perception of shape-at-a-slant , 1985 .

[11]  H. Leibowitz,et al.  Role of changes in accommodation and convergence in the perception of size. , 1966, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[12]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  Adaptation to apparent concomitant motion in the absence of physical or retinal motion , 1978 .

[13]  B. Gillam,et al.  Perception of slant when perspective and stereopsis conflict: experiments with aniseikonic lenses. , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

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

[15]  W. Gogel,et al.  Perception of the relative distance position of objects as a function of other objects in the field. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[16]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  The effect of perceived distance on perceived movement , 1974 .

[17]  J C Hay,et al.  Visual Adaptation to an Altered Correlation between Eye Movement and Head Movement , 1968, Science.

[18]  W C Gogel,et al.  The sensing of retinal motion , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[19]  D. McCready.  On size, distance, and visual angle perception , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  D R Proffitt,et al.  The priority of perceived distance for perceiving motion has not been demonstrated: Critical comments on Gogel’s “The sensing of retinal motion” , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[22]  E R Wist,et al.  Spatial and fixation conditions affecting the temporal course of changes in perceived relative distance , 1976, Psychological research.

[23]  D. McCready,et al.  Moon illusions redescribed , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[24]  W C Gogel,et al.  The role of suggested size in distance responses , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[25]  I. Rock.  The Logic of Perception , 1983 .

[26]  W C Gogel,et al.  Effects of Posthypnotic Suggestion on Perceived Egocentric Distance , 1980, Perception.

[27]  Walter C. Gogel.  An illusory motion of a stationary target during head motion is unaffected by paradoxical retinal motion: A reply to Shebilske and Proffitt (1983) , 1983 .

[28]  William Epstein,et al.  Does retinal size have a unique correlate in perceived size? , 1969 .

[29]  K D Broota,et al.  Automatic and attentional components in perception of size-at-a-distance , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[31]  Adelbert Ames.  The Rotating Trapezoid (Cont.): Explanation of the Visual Phenomena. , 1952 .

[32]  Irvin Rock,et al.  The perception of visual angle , 1964 .

[33]  H. C. van der Meer.  Interrelation of the effects of binocular disparity and perspective cues on judgments of depth and height , 1979 .

[34]  W C Gogel,et al.  The common occurrence of errors of perceived distance , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[35]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  Familiar size and the theory of off-sized perceptions , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[37]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  A comparison of oculomotor and motion parallax cues of egocentric distance , 1979, Vision Research.

[38]  Frederick S. Duncan.  Kinetic Art: On My Psychokinematic Objects , 1975 .

[39]  H W Leibowitz,et al.  SENSORY, LEARNED, AND COGNITIVE MECHANISMS OF SIZE PERCEPTION * , 1971, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[40]  Edwin G. Boring,et al.  The Perception of Objects , 1946 .

[41]  D R Proffitt,et al.  Paradoxical retinal motions during head movements: Apparent motion without equivalent apparent displacement , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[43]  Goldstein Eb.  Spatial layout, orientation relative to the observer, and perceived projection in pictures viewed at an angle. , 1987 .

[44]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  An indirect method of measuring perceived distance from familiar size , 1976 .

[45]  J M Loomis,et al.  Agreement between indirect measures of perceived distance , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[46]  D. McCready,et al.  Size-distance perception and accommodation-convergence micropsia--a critique. , 1965, Vision research.

[47]  W. Gogel,et al.  EQUIDISTANCE TENDENCY AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. , 1965, Psychological bulletin.

[48]  M. Peterson,et al.  The detection of real and apparent concomitant rotation in a three-dimensional cube: Implications for perceptual interactions , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[49]  Hiroshi Ono,et al.  Size-distance paradox with accommodative micropsia , 1974 .

[50]  H. W. Leibowitz,et al.  The effect of convergence on the vestibulo-ocular reflex and implications for perceived movement , 1982, Vision Research.

[51]  W C Gogel,et al.  Directional separation and the size cue to distance , 1971, Psychologische Forschung.

[52]  Alfred H. Holway,et al.  Determinants of Apparent Visual Size with Distance Variant , 1941 .

[53]  H Wallach,et al.  Adaptation in motion perception: Alteration of induced motion , 1978, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[55]  Goldstein Eb.  Geometry or not geometry? Perceived orientation and spatial layout in pictures viewed at an angle. , 1988 .

[56]  Sheldon Richmond,et al.  Illusions, Patterns and Pictures: A Cross-Cultural Perspective by J. B. Deregowski (review) , 1983 .

[57]  Hans Wallach,et al.  On the relation of adaptation to field displacement during head movements to the constancy of visual direction , 1970 .

[58]  Stephen R. Ellis,et al.  Distortions of perceived visual out of pictures , 1987 .

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

[60]  J. Gibson.  The Senses Considered As Perceptual Systems , 1967 .

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

[62]  W. Epstein,et al.  Perception of slant-in-depth is automatic , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[63]  Johannes Dichgans,et al.  Perceived distance and the perceived speed of self-motion: Linear vs. angular velocity? , 1975 .

[64]  Hay Jc,et al.  Space-time adaptation of visual position constancy. , 1973 .

[65]  E. Bruce Goldstein.  Rotation of objects in pictures viewed at an angle: evidence for different properties of two types of pictorial space. , 1979 .

[66]  Walter C. Gogel,et al.  The validity of the size-distance invariance hypothesis with cue reduction , 1971 .

[67]  Robert T. Hennessy,et al.  Oculomotor adjustments and size constancy , 1972 .

[68]  I. Rock,et al.  Speed constancy as a function of size constancy , 1968 .

[69]  G S HARKER,et al.  The effectiveness of size cues to relative distance as a function of lateral visual separation. , 1955, Journal of experimental psychology.

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

[71]  Johannes Dichgans,et al.  Motion constancy dependent upon perceived distance and the spatial frequency of the stimulus pattern , 1976 .

[72]  W C Gogel,et al.  Eye Fixation and Attention as Modifiers of Perceived Distance , 1977, Perceptual and motor skills.

[73]  Hans Wallach,et al.  Adaptation in the constancy of visual direction measured by a one-trial method , 1969 .

[74]  W C Gogel,et al.  Perceived depth is a necessary factor in apparent motion concomitant with head motion: A reply to Shebilske and Proffitt , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[75]  J. Gibson.  The perception of the visual world , 1951 .

[76]  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.

[77]  D H Mershon,et al.  Local autonomy in visual space. , 1977, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

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

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

[80]  John C. Baird.  Human space perception : proceedings of the Dartmouth conference , 1970 .