Boundary extension: The role of magnification, object size, context, and binocular information

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 31, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 1288-1307

  Bertamini, Marco ^a   Jones, Luke A ^a   Spooner, Alice ^b   Hecht, Heiko ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL LANCASHIRE   (United Kingdom)

^c JOHANNES GUTENBERG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Boundary extension; Naive physics; Pictorial perception; Space

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BINOCULAR VISION; DEPTH PERCEPTION; ENVIRONMENT; HUMAN; PERCEPTION; VISION;

ENVIRONMENT; HUMANS; SIZE PERCEPTION; SPACE PERCEPTION; VISION, BINOCULAR; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 32644490149     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.31.6.1288     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Ames, A., Jr. (1925). The illusion of depth from single pictures. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 10, 137-148.
2. Bertamini, M., Latto, R., & Spooner, A. (2003). The Venus effect: Depiction of mirrors and mirror reflections in art. Perception, 32, 593-599.
3. Bertamini, M., & Parks, T. E. (2005). On what people know about images on mirrors. Cognition, 98, 85-104.
4. Bertamini, M., Spooner, A., & Hecht, H. (2003). Naive optics: Predicting and perceiving reflections in mirrors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 982-1002.
5. Bozzi, P. (1990). Fisica ingenua. Milan, Italy: Garzanti.
6. Candel, I., Merckelbach, H., & Zandbergen, M. (2003). Boundary distortions for neutral and emotional pictures. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 691-695.
7. Croucher, C. J., Bertamini, M., & Hecht, H. (2002). Naive optics: Understanding the geometry of mirror reflections. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 546-562.
8. Cutting, J. E. (2003). Reconceiving perceptual space. In H. Hecht, M. Atherton, & R. Schwartz (Eds.), Looking into pictures: An interdisciplinary approach to pictorial space (pp. 215-238). Boston: MIT Press.
9. Friedman, A. (1979). Framing pictures: The role of knowledge in automatized encoding and memory for gist. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108, 316-355.
10. Gottesman, C. V., & Intraub, H. (2002). Surface construal and the mental representation of scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 589-599.
11. Gottesman, C. V., & Intraub, H. (2003). Constraints on spatial extrapolation in the mental representation of scenes: View-boundaries versus object-boundaries. Visual Cognition, 10, 875-893.
12. Hagen, M. (1980). The psychology of pictorial representation. New York: Academic Press.
13. Hagen, M., & Giorgi, R. (1993). Where is the camera? Ecological Psychology, 5, 65-84.
14. Hecht, H., Bertamini, M., & Gamer, M. (2005). Naive optics: Acting upon mirror reflections. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 1023-1038.
15. Hecht, H., van Doom, A. J., & Koenderink, J. (1999). Compression of visual space in natural scenes and in their photographic counterparts. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1269-1286.
16. Hochberg, J. (1986). Representation of motion and space in video and cinematic displays. In K. J. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (pp. 22.21-22.64). New York: Wiley.
17. Hubbard, T. L. (1995). Environmental invariants in the representation of motion: Implied dynamics and representational momentum, gravity, friction, and centripetal force. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 322-338.
18. Intraub, H. (2002). Anticipatory spatial representations of natural scenes: Momentum without movement? Visual Cognition, 9, 93-119.
19. Intraub, H. (2004). Anticipatory spatial representation of 3D regions explored by sighted observers and a deaf-and-blind-observer. Cognition, 94, 19-37.
20. Intraub, H., Bender, R. S., & Mangels, J. A. (1992). Looking at pictures but remembering scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 180-191.
21. Intraub, H., Gottesman, C. V., & Bills, A. J. (1998). Effects of perceiving and imagining scenes on memory for pictures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 186-201.
22. Intraub, H., Gottesman, C. V., Willey, E. V., & Zuk, I. J. (1996). Boundary extension for briefly glimpsed photographs: Do common perceptual processes result in unexpected memory distortions? Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 118-134.
23. Intraub, H., & Richardson, M. (1989). Wide-angle memories of close-up scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 179-187.
24. Kaiser, M. K., Proffitt, D. R., Whelan, S. M., & Hecht, H. (1992). The influence of animation on dynamical judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 669-690.
25. Kanizsa, G. (1979). Organization in vision. New York: Praeger.
26. Kennedy, J. M. (1974). A psychology of picture perception. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27. Kubovy, M. (1986). The psychology of perspective and Renaissance art. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
28. Legault, E., & Standing, L. (1992). Memory for size of drawings and photographs. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75, 121.
29. Lumsden, E. A. (1980). Problems of magnification and minification: An explanation of the distortions of distance, slant, shape and velocity. In M. Hagen (Ed.), The psychology of pictorial representation (pp. 91-135). New York: Academic Press.
30. Lumsden, E. A. (1983). Perception of radial distance as a function of magnification and truncation of depicted spatial layout. Perception & Psychophysics, 33, 177-182.
31. McCloskey, M., Washburn, A., & Felch, L. (1983). Naive physics: The straight-down belief and its origin. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 636-649.
32. Prenz, P., & Gerbino, W. (2004). Boundary extension: Proportional versus non-proportional transformations in visual memory. Perception, 33, 139.
33. Proffitt, D. R. (1999). Naïve physics. In R. A. Wilson & F. C. Keil (Eds.), The MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences (pp. 577-579). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
34. Rogers, S. (2003). Truth and meaning in pictorial space. In H. Hecht, R. Schwartz & M. Atherton (Eds.), Looking into pictures: An interdisciplinary approach to pictorial space (pp. 119-163). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35. Schlosberg, H. (1941). Stereoscopic depth from single pictures. American Journal of Psychology, 54, 601-605.
36. Seamon, J. G., Schlegel, S. E., Hiester, P. M., Landau, S. M., & Blumenthal, B. F. (2002). Misremembering pictured objects: People of all ages demonstrate the boundary extension illusion. American Journal of Psychology, 115, 151-167.
37. Simons, D. J. (2000). Current approaches to change blindness. Visual Cognition, 7, 1-15.
38. TNO. (1972). Test for stereoscopic vision (10th ed.). Utrecht, the Netherlands: Lameris Tech.
39. Yang, T. L., & Kubovy, M. (1999). Weakening the robustness of perspective: Evidence for a modified theory of compensation in picture perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 456-467.