The Effect of Attitude upon the Perception of Size

Gilinsky, Alberta S.

doi:10.2307/1418890

Cited by 151 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, observers do not have direct access to information about angular subtense, at least not for targets viewed binocularly. These conclusions are supported by earlier work on object perception and size constancy (Boring, 1943;Gilinsky, 1955;Gogel, 1969;Ross, Jenkins and Johnstone, 1980;Burbeck, 1987a), so it is worth speculating about the reasons for these limitations on the processing of visual size.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

“…Five different disparities were used coy-constancy that observers will match either the ering a range of + 40 min arc. Because there was no explicit standard and no feedback, the ob- (Gilinsky, 1955: Leibowitz and Harvey, 1969: Carlson, 1977. No instructions or feedback affected by random variations in disparity were supplied in the first experiment, but the (second column), but error feedback is not two authors who served as subjects could have sufficient to produce good objective velocity made an unconscious choice in favor of angular discrimination (third column).…”

Section: Signal and That This Signal Is Unaffected Bymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In other cases, the intent was to explore limitations on size constancy, e.g., over what distances observers could match objective size before perhaps regressing to match based on angular size. In one of the most interesting of these studies, Gilinsky (1955) found that observers were able to match either the retinal or the objective size of the test object, depending on the instructions given by the experimenter. Gilinsky's results, subsequently verified in other laboratories (Carlson, 1960;1977;Leibowitz and Harvey, 1969), indicate that matching is a weak guide to the cognitive (or neural) operations underlying size constancy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Visual Processing of Object Velocity and Acceleration

McKee¹

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Section: Signal and That This Signal Is Unaffected Bymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Visual Processing of Object Velocity and Acceleration

McKee¹

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In a classic size-perception study (Gilinsky, 1955), the variable placed at a distance of 30 m was matched to the standard placed at 30-1,200 m. Under objective-size instructions, the variable increased as the distance of the standard increased (i.e., overconstancy), whereas under retinal-size instructions, the variable decreased as the distance of the standard increased (i.e., underconstancy). If the variable is constant over the distance of the standard, it is said that size constancy prevails.…”

Section: Definitions and A Review Of Close Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The perception of distance up to 100 m has been examined by using the methods of equal-appearing intervals and bisection (Gilinsky, 1955;Harway, 1963;Kuroda, 1971). In the typical situation, the subject stands at one end of an open field and directs the experimenter to move a pointer, to mark off successive increments of equal-appearing intervals.…”

Section: Definitions and A Review Of Close Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How accurate is size and distance perception for very far terrestrial objects? Function and causality

Higashiyama

Shimono

1994

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated absolute estimation of size and distance for natural and artificial objects at viewing distances of 1.1-15.3 km (Experiments 1 and 2) and 0.4-5.0 m (Experiment 3). The main results were that, regardless of distance range, size and distance estimates (S' and D') were related to objective size and distance (S and D), respectively, by a power function with an exponent of unity, but great individual differences in exponent were obtained for the far objects. The ratio S'ID' was reasonably represented by S'ID' = KO n and S'ID' = tan(aO+b), rather than S'ID' = tanO, where 0 is the visual angle. Partial correlations were obtained to examine whether (1) apparent size is determined by taking apparent distance into account or (2) both apparent size and apparent distance are determined directly by external stimuli. The combined data for the far objects and the data for the close objects showed that there were high correlations between Sand S' and between D and D' and a low correlation between D' and S'. The data of Experiment 2 showed that both D' and S' were highly correlated with S, D, and 0, and there was a high positive correlation between D' and S', It was suggested that the direct-perception model is valid under some situations, but the taking-into-account model is not supported in any set of data.In this study, we investigated perception of the size of and distance of very far objects. The perception of size and distance may not be correctly achieved for celestial objects such as the moon, the sun, and a constellation. For example, estimates of the size and distance of the moon may not be exact if you are not an astronomer. Some authors have indeed assumed that there is a perceptible maximal distance, beyond which any object is perceived to be at a constant distance and distance is not discriminated at all (Gilinsky, 1951;Indow, 1991;Luneburg, 1947;Nishi, 1930). Others have assumed that size constancy does not hold for very far objects and that the visual system tends to respond to the visual angle, rather than the distal size, of the object (Higashiyama, 1992).How do we perceive size and distance for very far terrestrial objects? In this study, we report three experiments.We would like to express our appreciation to Captain Matsumura and the crews of Shiojimaru, who traveled across Tokyo Bay in Experiment 2. We would like to thank John C. Baird, Hal A. Sedgwick. and Myron L. Braunstein for their useful comments on the earlier manuscript. and thank an anonymous reviewer for his or her help in improving the English expressions. A. Higashiyama's mailing address is: Institute of Human Sciences, College of Integrated Arts and Sciences, University of Osaka Prefecture, Sakai 593, Japan. K. Shimono's mailing address is: Social Sciences Laboratory, Tokyo University of Mercantile Marine, Koto-ku, Tokyo 135, Japan.We first sought to specify the distance range over which the accurate perception of size and distance would be maintained. In Experiments 1 and 2, subjects estimated absolute size and distan...

show abstract

Depth Perception

Howard¹

2002

Stevens' Handbook of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter contains a review of information that we use to perceive the three‐dimensional structure of the visual world. To a limited extent for near viewing we can use nonvisual signals from the accommodative state of the lens or the state of convergence of the eyes. Visual information available to one eye included image blur arising from out‐of‐focus images; overlap between images of objects at different distances serves as a cue to relative depth. Shading and shadows provide a rich source of information about relative depth, although the sign of depth relations can be ambiguous. When we move past a stationary scene, the relative motion of images of objects at different distances indicates very small differences in depth. Image expansion of an approaching object indicates time to impact and the symmetry of image motion indicates whether the approaching object will hit us. Binocular information available when only both eyes are open includes differences between the images in the two eyes. These binocular disparities provide information about the distances of objects, and the inclination and curvature of surfaces. The chapter ends with a discussion of how different depth cues interact to produce a unified percept of the three‐dimensional structure of the world.

show abstract

The Effect of Attitude upon the Perception of Size

Cited by 151 publications

References 0 publications

Visual Processing of Object Velocity and Acceleration

Visual Processing of Object Velocity and Acceleration

How accurate is size and distance perception for very far terrestrial objects? Function and causality

Depth Perception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About