A Relationship between Increments of Distance and Estimates of Objective Size

Jenkin, Noel

doi:10.2307/1420038

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Order of comparison movement.-The fact that order of comparison movement was a critical variable accords well with previous work using the methods of limits or adjustment (Baird, 1963;Jenkin, 1959;Wallach & McKenna, 1960). The order effect is a very old psychophysical problem, yet unsolved, but cer-tainly it is open to empirical test i n the present situation.…”

Section: Results and Discassionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…11, Jenkin, 1957, projective (Exps. 11) influence escimates of size toward the initial physical size setting of the comparison (Baird, 1963;Jenkin, 1959;Wallach & McKenna, 1960). For example, judgments obtained with objective and projective instructions depend upon available visual cues (Baird, 1963;Biersdorf, et al, 1963), and the distances of comparison and standard stimuli (Gilinsky, 1955;Epstein, 1963).…”

Section: Stimulus/response Factors In Size Instruction Effects 923mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stimulus and Response Factors in Size Instruction Effects

Baird¹

1965

Percept Mot Skills

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Results and Discassionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Stimulus/response Factors In Size Instruction Effects 923mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stimulus and Response Factors in Size Instruction Effects

Baird¹

1965

Percept Mot Skills

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In order to study more fully the relationship between small increments of distance and estimates of objective size, Jenkin (1959) performed a second and a third experiment, in which he presented comparison stimuli at distances intermediate between those employed in his earlier study. In the second experiment, the comparison was located at a distance of 20, 40, or 160 inches.…”

Section: Oner Estimation In Size Judgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When plotted against the logarithms of the distances, the mean size matches gave points fitted by a straight line. According to Jenkin (1959), this straight line relationship "suggests the existence of some hitherto undiscovered law relating apparent size and short increments in distance" (p. 348).…”

Section: Oner Estimation In Size Judgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The current status of the size-distance hypotheses.

Epstein¹,

Park²,

Casey³

1961

Psychological Bulletin

227

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the history of the psychology of perception few matters have been of more continuous interest than the relationship between perceived size and perceived distance. It is our objective to examine the current status of this question by reviewing the recent literature. With some exceptions our review will be confined to investigations which have been reported since 1952. Several surveys of the literature prior to 1952 are available, and for this reason we will have relatively little to say about these earlier investigations (reviews can be found in

show abstract

“…This phenomenon, referred to as overconstancy, has been demonstrated in a variety of experiments (Franklin and Erickson, 1969;Jenkin, 1959Jenkin, , 1957; and may help to account for the systematic (but nonsignificant) trend toward greater judged enclosure with increasing scale of space (see Figure 2). This phenomenon, referred to as overconstancy, has been demonstrated in a variety of experiments (Franklin and Erickson, 1969;Jenkin, 1959Jenkin, , 1957; and may help to account for the systematic (but nonsignificant) trend toward greater judged enclosure with increasing scale of space (see Figure 2).…”

Section: Perceived Enclosure and The Perception Of Size And Distancementioning

confidence: 82%

Perceived Openness-Enclosure of Architectural Space

Hayward¹,

Franklin²

1974

Environment and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Experimental investigations of space perception have been largely confined to the study of perceived size, distance, form, and motion. Perceptual psychologists have only recently directed their attention to some of the more complex dimensions that determine our responses to the large-scale environment (Berlyne, 1960;Wohlwill, 1966). While it appears to be generally accepted that architectural variables are important determinants of behavior, systematic investigations of their effects are rather rare. This paper is concerned with the architectural variables that determine the perception of open and enclosed space. Several authors (Lynch, 1971;Simonds, 1961;Spreiregen, 1965) seem to agree that the organization and characteristics of vertical elements (e.g., walls, colonades, trees) distinguish an undifferentiated, open area from a confined, articulated enclosed space. The purpose of this experiment is to examine two alternative interpretations of the effect of boundary elements on the perception of open and enclosed space.AUTHORS' NOTE: This research was based primarily on a masters thesis conducted by Scott C. Hayward under the direction of Samuel S. Franklin.

show abstract

A Relationship between Increments of Distance and Estimates of Objective Size

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

Stimulus and Response Factors in Size Instruction Effects

Stimulus and Response Factors in Size Instruction Effects

The current status of the size-distance hypotheses.

Perceived Openness-Enclosure of Architectural Space

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About