Information integration in judgements of time to contact

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology

Volumn 56 A, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 1165-1189

  DeLucia, Patricia R ^a   Kaiser, Mary K ^b   Bush, Jason M ^a   Meyer, Les E ^a   Sweet, Barbara T ^b  

^a TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NASA AMES RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; NON-PROGRAMMATIC; TIME; TIME PERCEPTION; VISION;

NON-PROGRAMMATIC;

CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; TIME FACTORS; TIME PERCEPTION; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0242350278     PISSN: 02724987     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02724980343000053     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Anderson, N. H. (1974). Algebraic models in perception. In E. C. Carterette & M. P. Friedman (Eds.), Handbook of perception: Vol. 2. Psychophysical judgement and measurement (pp. 215-298). New York: Academic Press.
2. Anderson, N. H. (1981). Foundations of information integration theory. New York: Academic Press.
3. Anderson, N. H. (1982). Methods of information integration theory. New York: Academic Press.
4. Anderson, N. H. (1983). Cognitive algebra in intuitive physics. In H. Geissler, H. F. J. M. Buffart, E. L. J. Leeuwenberg, & V. Sarris (Eds.), Modern issues in perception (pp. 229-253). Amsterdam: North Holland.
5. Anderson, N. H. (1996). A functional theory of cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
6. Bradshaw, M. F., & Rogers, B. J. (1996). The interaction of binocular disparity and motion parallax in the computation of depth. Vision Research, 36, 3457-3468.
7. Bruno, N., & Cutting, J. E. (1988). Minimodularity and the perception of layout. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 161-170.
8. Cutting, J. E., & Bruno, N. (1988). Additivity, subadditivity, and the use of visual information: A reply to Massaro (1988). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 422-424.
9. Cutting, J. E., Bruno, N., Brady, N. P., & Moore, C. (1992). Selectivity, scope, and simplicity of models: A lesson from fitting judgements of perceived depth. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 364-381.
10. Cutting, J. E., & Wang, R. F. (2000). Heading judgments in minimal environments: The value of a heuristic when invariants are rare. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 1146-1159.
11. Cutting, J. E., Wang, R. F., Fluckiger, M., & Baumberger, B. (1999). Human heading judgments and object-based motion information. Vision Research, 39, 1079-1105.
12. DeLucia, P. R. (1991). Pictorial and motion-based information for depth perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 738-748.
13. DeLucia, P. R. (1995). Effects of pictorial relative size and ground-intercept information on judgments about potential collisions in perspective displays. Human Factors, 37, 528-538.
14. DeLucia, P. R. (2002). Judgments of time to contact when an approaching object is partially concealed by a static or moving occluder [Abstract]. Journal of Vision, 2(7), 348a, http://journalofvision.Org/2/7/348/, DOI: 10.1167/2.7.348.
15. DeLucia, P. R. (in press). Multiple information sources influence time-to-contact judgments: Do heuristics accommodate limits in sensory and cognitive processes? In H. Hecht & G. J. P. Savelsburgh (Eds.), Advances in psychology series: Theories of time-to-contact. North-Holland, Elsevier.
16. DeLucia, P. R., & Liddell, G. W. (1998). Cognitive motion extrapolation and cognitive clocking in prediction motion tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 901-914.
17. DeLucia, P. R., & Meyer, L. E. (1999). Judgments about the time to contact between two objects during simulated self-motion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1813-1833.
18. DeLucia, P. R., & Novak, J. B. (1997). Judgments of relative time-to- contact of more than two approaching objects: Toward a method. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 913-928.
19. DeLucia, P. R., & Warren, R. (1994). Pictorial and motion-based depth information during active control of self-motion: Size-arrival effects on collision avoidance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 783-798.
20. Dosher, B. A., Sperling, G., & Wurst, S. A. (1986). Tradeoffs between stereopsis and proximity luminance covariance as determinants of perceived 3D structure. Vision Research, 26, 973-990.
21. Durgin, F. H. (1996). Visual aftereffect of texture density contingent on color of frame. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 207-223.
22. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
23. Gray, R., & Regan, D. (1998). Accuracy of estimating time to collision using binocular and monocular information. Vision Research, 55, 499-512.
24. Hills, B. L. (1975). Some studies of movement perception, age and accidents (Rep. No. SR137). Crowthorne, UK: Department of the Environment, Transport and Road Research Laboratory.
25. Hochberg, J. (1986). Representation of motion and space in video and cinematic displays. In K. Boff, J. Thomas, & L. Kaufman (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (pp. 1-64). Toronto: Wiley.
26. Hoffmann, E. R., & Mortimer, R. G. (1994). Drivers' estimates of time to collision. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 26, 511-520.
27. Johnston, E. B., Gumming, B. G., & Landy, M. S. (1994). Integration of stereopsis and motion shape cues. Vision Research, 34, 2259-2275.
28. Kaiser, M. K., & Mowafy, L. (1993). Optical specification of time-to-passage: Observers' sensitivity to global tau. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 1028-1040.
29. Kerzel, D., Hecht, H., & Kim, N. (1999). Image velocity, not tau, explains arrival-time judgments from global optical flow. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1540-1555.
30. Kunnapas, T. (1968). Distance perception as a function of available visual cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77, 523-529.
31. Landy, M. S., Maloney, L. T., Johnston, E. B., & Young, M. (1995). Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: In defence of weak fusion. Vision Research, 35, 389-412.
32. Lee, D. N. (1976). A theory of visual control of braking based on information about time-to-collision. Perception, 5, 437-459.
33. Levitt, H. (1970). Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 49, 467-477.
34. Massaro, D. W. (1988). Ambiguity in perception and experimentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 417-421.
35. Massaro, D. W., & Friedman, D. (1990). Models of integration given multiple sources of information. Psychological Review, 97, 225-252.
36. Poom, L., & Borjesson, E. (1999). Perceptual depth synthesis in the visual system as revealed by selective adaptation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 504-517.
37. Rushton, S. K., & Wann J. P. (1999). Weighted combination of size and disparity: A computational model for timing a ball catch. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 186-190.
38. Schiff, W., & Detwiler, M. L. (1979). Information used in judging impending collision. Perception, 8, 647-658.
39. Schiff, W., & Oldak, R. (1990). Accuracy of judging time to arrival: Effects of modality, trajectory, and gender. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 303-316.
40. Todd, J. T. (1981). Visual information about moving objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 795-810.
41. Tresilian, J. R. (1991). Empirical and theoretical issues in the perception of time to contact. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 865-876.
42. Tresilian, J. R. (1995). Perceptual and cognitive processes in time-to-contact estimation: Analysis of prediction-motion and relative judgement tasks. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 231-245.
43. Tresilian, J. R. (1997). Revised tau hypothesis: A consideration of Wann's (1996) analyses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 1272-1281.
44. Tresilian, J. R. (1999). Analysis of recent empirical challenges to an account of interceptive timing. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 515-528.
45. Yakimoff, N., Mateeff, S., Ehrenstein, W. H., & Hohnsbein, J. (1993). Motion extrapolation performance: A linear model approach. Human Factors, 35, 501-510.
46. Young, M. J., Landy, M. S., & Maloney, L. T. (1993). A perturbation analysis of depth perception from combinations of texture and motion cues. Vision Research, 33, 2685-2696.