The metric of visual space

The geometric properties of visual space in the horizontal plane were measured by four different procedures. Five observers were asked to judge distances, angles, and areas defined by pairs and triplets of stakes, using magnitude estimation, category estimation, mapping, and perceptual matching. All judgments took place outdoors in a broad, open field under full-cue conditions. Stimuli oriented in depth were judged to be half as large as the same stimuli oriented in the frontal plane. Angles facing either directly toward or directly away from the observer were seen as approximately twice as large as those seen on their sides. Four mathematical models for visual space are examined. Both the hyperbolic model of Luneburg (1947) and the spherical model of Reid (1764/1813) fail, each for different reasons. Two other models, however, produce a reasonably complete description of visual space. In the first model, visual space is an affine-transformed version of a Euclidean physical space. In the second model, distances are viewed as vectors that can be broken down into in-depth and frontal components relative to the observer. The in-depth component of this vector is contracted by a constant amount in visual space.

[1]  W. Hoffman The Lie algebra of visual perception , 1966 .

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

[3]  John C. Baird,et al.  Psychophysical analysis of visual space , 1974 .

[4]  W. Hoffman Subjective geometry and geometric psychology , 1980 .

[5]  T. Indow Alleys in visual space , 1979 .

[6]  John C. Baird,et al.  CHAPTER 1 – ANALYSIS OF VISUAL SPACE , 1970 .

[7]  Thomas Reid,et al.  An inquiry into the human mind , 1970 .

[8]  R. B. Angell The Geometry of Visibles , 1974 .

[9]  L E Marks,et al.  Cross-modality matching functions generated by magnitude estimation , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[10]  Lee L. Rubin,et al.  Psychophysical scales of apparent heaviness and the size-weight illusion , 1970 .

[11]  EFFECTS OF FEAR-CONDITIONING AND ELECTRICSHOCK ON ORGANIC NUTRIENT SELECTION IN THE ALBINO RAT , 1963 .

[12]  M. Teghtsoonian,et al.  Range and regression effects in magnitude scaling , 1978, Perception & psychophysics.

[13]  Tarow Indow,et al.  Two Interpretations of Binocular Visual Space: Hyperbolic and Euclidean , 1967 .

[14]  M. Teghtsoonian,et al.  Children's scales of length and loudness: a developmental application of cross-modal matching. , 1980, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[15]  A. Battro,et al.  Riemannian Geometries of Variable Curvature in Visual Space: Visual Alleys, Horopters, and Triangles in Big Open Fields , 1976, Perception.

[16]  John C. Baird,et al.  Fundamentals of scaling and psychophysics , 1978 .

[17]  Constant errors occur in matched reproduction of angles even when likely biases are eliminated , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[18]  Hypnotic deafness: a psychophysical study of responses to tone intensity as modified by hypnosis. , 1979, The American journal of psychology.

[19]  J. Gibson Perception as a function of stimulation , 1959 .

[20]  M. Teghtsoonian,et al.  Scaling apparent distance in natural indoor settings , 1969 .

[21]  J. C. Stevens,et al.  Brightness and loudness as functions of stimulus duration , 1966 .

[22]  E. Brunswik,et al.  Distal focussing of perception: Size-constancy in a representative sample of situations. , 1944 .

[23]  Richard C. Sherman,et al.  Investigating Cognitive Representations of Spatial Relationships , 1979 .

[24]  Patrick Suppes,et al.  IS VISUAL SPACE EUCLIDEAN , 1977 .

[25]  B. Stacey,et al.  Judgment of angle size: An experimental appraisal , 1971 .

[26]  K. E. Beery Estimation of Angles , 1968, Perceptual and motor skills.

[27]  Rudolf K. Luneburg,et al.  Metric of binocular visual space , 1950 .

[28]  M. Teghtsoonian,et al.  Scaling apparent distance in a natural outdoor setting , 1970 .

[29]  L. Marks,et al.  Twelve meanings of the measure constant in psychophysical power functions , 1983 .

[30]  A A BLANK,et al.  The Luneburg theory of binocular visual space. , 1953, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[31]  Apparent length as a function of tilt does not depend on orientation of the standard. , 1972, Journal of experimental psychology.

[32]  G. H. Fisher An Experimental Study of Angular Subtension , 1969, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[33]  H. Babkoff Magnitude estimation of short electrocutaneous pulses , 1976, Psychological research.

[34]  Tarow Indow,et al.  AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF THE LUNEBURG THEORY OF BINOCULAR SPACE PERCEPTION (3):THE EXPERIMENTS IN A SPACIOUS FIELD , 1963 .

[35]  L O Harvey,et al.  Effect of instructions, environment, and type of test object on matched size. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[36]  Constant errors donot occur in the matched reproduction of angles , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[37]  W. Johnson,et al.  Studies in language behavior: A program of research , 1944 .

[38]  J C Baird,et al.  Studies of the cognitive representation of spatial relations: II. A familiar environment. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[39]  B. Brody,et al.  Thomas Reid's Inquiry , 1976 .