Constancy of egocentric visual direction

Morgan, Cynthia

doi:10.3758/bf03214296

Cited by 76 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several researchers have shown that people are able to point accurately to the location they are fixating, even in complete darkness (Hill, 1972;Morgan, 1978). If fixation location in the earlier experiments was somehow affected by the response condition, then differences that we observed in the pointing responses may have been mediated by differences in eye position.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 48%

“…Some researchers have chosen to explore the former issue, whereas others have focused on the latter. For example, a number of researchers have examined localization as a function of the number and type of eye movements that subjects use to fixate a target to be localized (Festinger & Canon, 1965;Honda, 1984Honda, , 1985, or as a function of the retinal location of the target (Hill, 1972;Morgan, 1978). These studies have mainly been concerned with potential differences in the information available about a visual target after different types of stimulation.…”

Section: Differential Use Of Distance and Location Information For Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the visual direction of moving and stationary objects is usually perceived accurately, systematic departures from accurate localization have been demonstrated in a number of situations (e.g., Festinger & Canon, 1965;Hill, 1972;Matin, Matin, & Pearce, 1969;Morgan, 1978). The conditions that induce mislocalization have been the subject of a substantial amount of research since the time of Helmholtz (1866Helmholtz ( /1963, because it is believed that an understanding of the failures of visual direction constancy can lead to a better understanding of the mechanisms that underlie accurate perceptual-motor behavior.…”

Section: Differential Use Of Distance and Location Information For Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Differential use of distance and location information for spatial localization

Abrams

Landgraf

1990

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Five experiments are reported in which subjects judged the movement or spatial location of a visible object that underwent a combination of real and induced (illusory) motion. When subjects attempted to reproduce the distance that the object moved by moving their unseen hands, they were more affected by the illusion than when they pointed to the object's perceived final location. Furthermore, pointing to the final location was more affected by the illusion when the hand movement began from the same position as that at which the object initially appeared, as compared with responses that began from other positions. The results suggest that people may separately encode two distinct types of spatial information: (1) information about the distance moved by an object and (2) information about the absolute spatial location ofthe object. Information about distance is more susceptible to the influence of an induced motion illusion, and people appear to rely differentially on the different types of spatial information, depending on features of the pointing response. The results have important implications for the mechanisms that underlie spatially oriented behavior in general.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 48%

Section: Differential Use Of Distance and Location Information For Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Differential Use Of Distance and Location Information For Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Differential use of distance and location information for spatial localization

Abrams

Landgraf

1990

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Morgan (1978) reported errors in egocentric direction attributable to misrepresentation in eye position. The amount of error depended on the amount of rotation of the eye from the primary direction of gaze; greater rotation led to greater error in directionalization and, by implication, to greater misrepresentation of eye position.…”

Section: Between-eye Differences In Slope: Non-central Cyclopean Eye?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between eye position and egocentric visual direction

Barbeito

Simpson

1991

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hering's model of egocentric visual direction assumes implicitly that the effect of eye position on direction is both linear and equal for the two eyes; these two assumptions were evaluated in the present experiment, Five subjects pointed (open-loop) to the apparent direction of a target seen under conditions in which the position of one eye was systematically varied while the position ofthe other eye was held constant. The data were analyzed through examination of the relationship between the variations in perceived egocentric direction and variations in expected egocentric direction based on the positions of the varying eye. The data revealed that the relationship between eye position and egocentric direction is indeed linear. Further, the data showed that, for some subjects, variations in the positions of the two eyes do not have equal effects on egocentric direction. Both the between-eye differences and the linear relationship may be understood in terms of individual differences in the location of the cyclopean eye, an unequal weighting of the positions of the eyes in the processing of egocentric direction, or some combination of these two factors.A good framework within which to study headcentric, egocentric visual direction is a model usually attributed to Hering, but traceable to Wells a century earlier (see Ono, 1981). This model describes the essentials of egocentric direction, which include the retinal location stimulated (local sign) and the positions of the two eyes. To describe the phenomenology of egocentric direction, a point of origin from which directions are perceived also seems necessary and is included in the model. This point of origin is most often called the cyclopean eye. Together, these three aspects of the perception of headcentric, egocentric visual direction provide a good description of our perception of direction, as well as the basis of a model for egocentric directionalization (Ono, 1991;Park & Shebilske, 1991;Swanston, Wade, & Ono, 1990). This paper focuses on the eye position component of egocentric direction.That the positions of both eyes affects egocentric visual direction is specified in the principles of visual direction extracted from Hering's writings (see Ono, 1979) and has been demonstrated to be true empirically even under conditions in which one of the two eyes is occluded (Ono & Gonda, 1978;Ono & Weber, 1981; Park & Shebilske,We thank H. E. Bedell, Hiroshi Ono, and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on an earlier draft of this paper. Also, for technical assistance, we thank C. L. Kuether and Tong Ho, who were supported by Core Center Grant P3D-EY0755I to the College of Optometry, University of Houston; Enita Torres for help in creating the graphics; and Becky Estrada for her ever-willingassistance in thelibrary. This research was partially supported by a Research Initiation Grant to R. Barbeito from the University of Houston. Reprint requests should be sent to Raphael Barbeito, College of Optometry, University of Houston, Houston, TX 77204-6052. 19...

show abstract

“…This may explain the tendency of subjects to underestimate the amount of rotation of their own eyes away from the straight-ahead position. This tendency was studied quantitatively by Morgan (1978), who had subjects fixate an eccentric target and then estimate whether another target was left or right of center (azimuth) in an otherwise unstructured field. There was a linear relationship between eccentricity of the fixation target and error in judging the straight-ahead direction.…”

Section: Remainder Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ocular proprioception and efference copy in registering visual direction

1991

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-We measured the roles of eye muscle proprioception ("inflow") and efference copy ("outflow") in registering eye position. During monocular fixation, pressing on the side of an occluded eye results in a passive rotation, changing the proprioception without affecting oculomotor efference. As we have shown previously, a constant press on the side of the viewing eye induces active resistance to rotation, changing efference because oculomotor innervation compensates for the eyepress; the viewing eye's fixation remains constant. Using these two types of eyepress, both perceived target deviations and pointing biases in an unstructured visual field were measured in 8 subjects under efference copy, proprioception and control (no eyepress) conditions. Eye deviation was measured photoelectrically. Physiological gains of efference copy and proprioception were about 5/8 and l/4 respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between perceptual judgement and open-loop pointing. The sum of gains of efference copy and proprioception, about 7/8, indicates incomplete registration of eye eccentricity in an unstructured field, and quantitatively accounts for several previously unexplained results in the literature.

show abstract

Constancy of egocentric visual direction

Cited by 76 publications

References 14 publications

Differential use of distance and location information for spatial localization

Differential use of distance and location information for spatial localization

The relationship between eye position and egocentric visual direction

Ocular proprioception and efference copy in registering visual direction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About