Distortions of distance and shape are not produced by a single continuous transformation of reach space

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 66, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 152-169

  Bingham, Geoffrey P ^a   Crowell, James A ^b   Todd, James T ^b  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2142761077     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03194869     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. BAIRD, J. C., & BIERSDORF, W. R. (1967). Quantitative functions for size and distance judgments. Perception & Psychophysics, 2, 161-166.
2. BINGHAM, G. P. (2003). Calibration of distance and size does not calibrate shape information: Comparison of dynamic monocular and static and dynamic binocular vision. Manuscript submitted for publication.
3. BINGHAM, G. P., BRADLEY, A., BAILEY, M., & VINNER, R. (2001). Accommodation, occlusion and disparity matching are used to guide reaching: A comparison of actual versus virtual environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 27, 1314-1344.
4. BINGHAM, G. P., CROWELL, J. A., & TODD, J. T. (2001, May). Distortions of distance and shape do not reflect a single continuous transformation on reach space. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Vision Sciences Society, Sarasota, FL.
5. BINGHAM, G. P., ZAAL, F., ROBIN, D., & SHULL, J. A. (2000). Distortions in definite distance and shape perception as measured by reaching without and with haptic feedback. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 1436-1460.
6. BRENNER, E., & VAN DAMME, W. J. M. (1997). The distance used for scaling disparities is the same as the one used for scaling retinal size. Vision Research, 37, 757-764.
7. BRENNER, E., & VAN DAMME, W. J. M. (1999). Perceived distance, shape and size. Vision Research, 39, 975-986.
8. CROWELL, J. A., TODD, J. T., & BINGHAM, G. P. (2000, November). Distinct visuomotor transformations for visually guided reaching. Paper presented at the 41st Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, New Orleans.
9. CROWELL, J. A., TODD, J. T., & BINGHAM, G. P. (2001, May). Distinct perceptual representations for visually guided reaches. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Vision Sciences Society, Sarasota, FL.
10. DOMINI, F., & CAUDEK, C. (1999). Perceiving surface slant from deformation of optic flow. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 426-444.
11. DRYDEN, I. L., & MARDIA, K. V. (1998). Statistical shape analysis. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
12. FERRIS, S. H. (1972). Motion parallax and absolute distance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 95, 258-263.
13. GILINSKY, A. (1951). Perceived size and distance in visual space. Psychological Review, 58, 460-482.
14. GILLAM, B. (1995). The perception of spatial layout from static optical information. In W. Epstein & S. J. Rogers (Eds.), Perception of space and motion (pp. 23-67). San Diego: Academic Press.
15. GILLAM, B., & CHAMBERS, D. (1985). Size and position are incongruous: Measurements on the Müller-Lyer figure. Perception & Psychophysics, 37, 549-556.
16. GOGEL, W. C. (1977). The metric of visual space. In W. Epstein (Ed.), Stability and constancy in visual perception: Mechanisms and processes (pp. 129-181). New York: Wiley.
17. GRUBER, H. (1954). The relation of perceived size to perceived distance. American Journal of Psychology, 67, 411-426.
18. HELMHOLTZ, H. VON (1925). Physiological optics (Vol. 3). New York: Optical Society of America.
19. HOCHBERG, J. E. (1978). Perception (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
20. HOWARD, I. P., & ROGERS, B. J. (1995). Binocular vision and stereopsis. New York: Oxford University Press.
21. INDOW, T. (1991). A critical review of Luneburg's model with regard to global structure of visual space. Psychological Review, 98, 430-453.
22. JOHNSTON, E. B. (1991). Systematic distortions of shape from stereopsis. Vision Research, 31, 1351-1360.
23. KILPATRICK, F. P., & ITTLESON, W. (1953). The size-distance invariance hypothesis. Psychological Review, 60, 223-231.
24. KOENDERINK, J. J., & VAN DOORN, A. J. (1987). Facts on optic flow. Biological Cybernetics, 56, 247-254.
25. KOENDERINK, J. J., & VAN DOORN, A. J. (1991). Affine structure from motion. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 8, 377-385.
26. LIND, M. (1996). Perceiving motion and rigid structure from optic flow: A combined weak-perspective and polar-perspective approach. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 1085-1102.
27. LIND, M., & BÖRJESSON, E. (2001). Perceived structure from optic flow: Consistent versus variable mapping of 3-D Euclidean structure. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 42, 105-112.
28. LOOMIS, J. M., PHILBECK, J. W., & ZAHORIK, P. (2002). Dissociation between location and shape in visual space. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 28, 1202-1212.
29. LUNEBURG, R. K. (1950). The metric of binocular space. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 40, 627-642.
30. NORMAN, J. F. (2002). Two visual systems and two theories of perception: An attempt to reconcile the constructivist and ecological approaches. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 25, 73-96.
31. NORMAN, J. F., & TODD, J. T. (1993). The perceptual analysis of structure from motion for rotating objects undergoing affine stretching transformations. Perception & Psychophysics, 3, 279-291.
32. PAGANO, C. C., & BINGHAM, G. P. (1998). Comparing measures of monocular distance perception: Verbal and reaching errors are not correlated. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 1037-1051.
33. SEDGWICK, H. A. (1986). Space perception. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (Vol. 1, pp. 21.1-21.57). New York: Wiley.
34. SEDGWICK, H. A. (2001). Visual space perception. In E. B. Goldstein (Ed.), Blackwell handbook of perception (pp. 128-167). Oxford: Blackwell.
35. THOMPSON, D. W. (1961). On growth and form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. TITTLE, J. S., TODD, J. T., PEROTTI, V. J., & NORMAN, J. F. (1995). Systematic distortion of perceived three-dimensional structure from motion and binocular stereopsis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 663-678.
37. TODD, J. T., & BRESSAN, P. (1990). The perception of 3-dimensional affine structure from minimal apparent motion sequences. Perception & Psychophysics, 48, 419-430.
38. TODD, J. T., & NORMAN, J. F. (1991). The visual perception of smoothly curved surfaces from minimal apparent motion sequences. Perception & Psychophysics, 50, 509-523.
39. TODD, J. T., & PEROTTI, V. J. (1999). The visual perception of surface orientation from optical motion. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1577-1589.
40. TODD, J. T., TITTLE, J. S., & NORMAN, J. F. (1995). Distortions of three-dimensional space in the perceptual analysis of motion and stereo. Perception, 24, 75-86.
41. WAGNER, M. (1985). The metric of visual space. Perception & Psycho-physics, 38, 483-495.