Texture gradients with perspective lines and horizon amplify the overestimation of relative size in pictorial spaces;Gradientes de textura com linhas de perspectiva e horizonte amplificam a superestimação de tamanho relativo em espaços pictóricos

Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 35-42

  Torro Alves, Nelson ^a   Fukusima, Sergio Sheiji ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Familiar size; Horizon; Pictorial depth cues; Relative size; Visual perception

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548700842     PISSN: 01027972     EISSN: 16787153     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/s0102-79722007000100006     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Aks, D. J., & Enns, J. T. (1996). Visual search for size is influenced by a background texture gradient. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22(6), 1467-1481.
2. Alves, N. T., & Fukusima, S. S. (2005). Efeitos de instruções e do horizonte nos julgamentos de tamanhos relativos pictóricos Psicologia Teoria e Pesquisa, 21(9), 157-169.
3. Bennett, D., & Warren, W. (2002). Size scaling: Retinal or environmental frame of reference. Perception & Pschophysics, 64(3), 462-477.
4. Botella, C., Villa, H., Garcia-Palacios, A., Banos, R. M., Perpina, C., & Alcaniz, M. (2004). Clinically significant virtual environments for the treatment of panic disorqer and agoraphobia. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 7(5), 527-535.
5. Cornsweet, T. (1962) The staircase method in psychophysics. American Journal of Psychology, 75, 4186-491.
6. Creem-Regehr, S. H., Willemsen, P., Gooch, A. A., &.Thompson, W. B. (2005). The influence of restricted viewing conditions on egocentric distance perception: Implications for real and virtual indoor environments. Perception, 34(2), 191-204.
7. Cutting, J. E., & Millard, R. T. (1984). Three gradients and the perception of flat and curved surfaces. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General 113(2), 198-216.
8. Dixon, M. W., Wraga, M., Proffitt, D. R., & Willians, G. C. (2000). Eye height scaling of absolute size in immersive and nonimersive displays. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26(2), 582-593.
9. Found, A., & Müller, H. J. (2001). Efficient search fbr size targets on a background texture gradient: Is detection guided by discontinuities in the retinal-size gradient of items? Perception, 30(1), 21-48.
10. Fukusima, S. S., & Da Silva, J. A. (1999). Familiar size as a cue to size and distance estimates. In P. R. Killen & W. R. Uttal (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Meeting of the International Society for Psychophysics (pp. 198-203). Tempe, AZ: International Society for Psychophysics.
11. Fukusima, S. S., & Faubert, J. (2001). Perceived lenght in the central visual field, evidences for visual field asymmetries. Vision Research, 41(16), 2119-2126.
12. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
13. Gilliam, B. (1995). The perception of special layout from static optical information. In W. Epstein & S. Rogers (Eds.), Handbook of perception and cognition: Perception of space and motion (pp. 23-67). London: Academic Press.
14. Gogel, W. C., & Da Silva, J. A. (1987a). A two-process theory of the response to size and distance. Perception & Psychophysics, 41(3), 220-238.
15. Gogel, W. C., & Da Silva, J. A. (1987b). Familiar size and the theory of off-sized perceptions. Perception & Psychophysics, 41(4), 318-328.
16. Goodenough, B., & Gilliam, B. (1997). Gradients as visual primitives. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23(2), 370-387.
17. Holway, A. H., & Boring, E. G. (1941). Determinants of apparent visual size with distance variant. American Journal of Psychology, 54, 91-37.
18. Loomis, J. M., & Blascovich, J. J. (1999). Immersive virtual environment technology as a basic research tool in psychology. Behavior Research Methods, Instrument, & Computers, 31 (4), 557-564.
19. Loomis, J. M., & Knapp, J. M. (2003). Visual perception of egocentric distance in real and virtual environments. In L. J. Hettinger & M. W. Haas (Eds.), Virtual and adaptative environment (pp. 21-46). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Miller, R. J. (2004). An empirical demostration of the interactive influence of distance and flatness information on size perception in pictures. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22, 1-21.
21. Predebon, J. (1992). The role of instructions and familiar size in absolute judgments of size and distance. Perception & Psychophysics, 51(4), 344-354.
22. Predebon, J. (1994). Perceived size of familiar objects and the theory of off sized perceptions. Perception & Pschophysics, 56(2), 238-247.
23. Previc, F. H. (1990). Functional specialization in the lower and upper visual fields in humans: Its ecological origins and neurophysiological implications. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13, 519-565.
24. Rock, I. (1985). La perception. Barcelona, España: Prensa Cientifica.
25. Rogers, S. (1946). The horizon-ratio relation as information for relative size in pictures. Perception & Psychophysics, 58(1), 142-162.
26. Sakata, H., Tsutsui, K., & Taira, M. (2005). Toward an understanding of the neural processing for 3D shape perception. Neuropsychologia, 43(2), 151-161.
27. Tsutsui, K., Taira, M., & Sakata, H. (2005). Neural mechanisms of three-dimensional vision. Neuroscience Research, 51(3), 221-229.
28. William, P. A., & Enns, J. T. (1996). Pictorial depth and framing have independent effects on the horizontal-vertical illusion. Perception, 25(8), 921-926.