The limits of visual mass perception

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 62, Issue 11, 2009, Pages 2210-2221

  Shim, Jaeho ^a   Hecht, Heiko ^b   Lee, Jung Eun ^c   Yook, Dong Won ^d   Kim, Ji Tae ^a  

^a BAYLOR UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b JOHANNES GUTENBERG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c Yonsei University   (South Korea)

^d Dankook University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Heuristics; Kinematics; Lifting motion; Point light; Visual perception

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; BIOMECHANICS; DECISION MAKING; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; PERCEPTION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; VISION; WEIGHT BEARING;

ADOLESCENT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; BIOMECHANICS; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; LIFTING; MALE; MOTION PERCEPTION; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; SPACE PERCEPTION; VISUAL PERCEPTION; WEIGHT PERCEPTION; WEIGHT-BEARING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 70349527975     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470210902730597     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Andersson, I. E. K., & Runeson, S. (2008). Realism of confidence, modes of apprehension, and variableuse in visual discrimination of relative mass. Ecological Psychology, 20, 1-31.
2. Barclay, C. D., Cutting, J. E., & Kozlowski, L. T. (1978). Temporal and spatial factors in gait perception that influence gender recognition. Perception & Psychophysics, 23, 145-152.
3. Bhalla, M., & Proffitt, D. R. (1999). Visual-motor recalibration in geographical slant perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1076-1096.
4. Bingham, G. P. (1987). Kinematic form and scaling: Further investigations and the visual perception of lifted weight. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 155-177.
5. Bingham, G. P. (1993). Scaling judgments of lifted weight: Lifter size and the role of the standard. Ecological Psychology, 5, 31-64.
6. Creem, S. H., & Proffitt, D. R. (1998). Two memories for geographical slant: Separation and interdependence of action and awareness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 22-36.
7. Cutting, J. E. (1978). Generation of synthetic male and female walkers through manipulation of a biomechanical invariant. Perception, 7, 393-405.
8. Cutting, J. E., & Kozlowski, L. T. (1977). Recognizing friends by their walk: Gait perception without familiarity cues. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 9, 353-356.
9. Franz, V. H., Gegenfurtner, K. R., Bülthoff, H. H., & Fahle, M. (2000). Grasping visual illusions: No evidence for a dissociation between perception and action. Psychological Science, 11, 20-25.
10. Gilden, D. L., & Proffitt, D. R. (1989). Understanding collision dynamics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 372-383.
11. Gilden, D. L., & Proffitt, D. R. (1994). Heuristic judgment of mass ratio in two-body collisions. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 708-720.
12. Hecht, H. (1996). Heuristics and invariants in dynamic event perception: Immunized concepts or nonstatements? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 61-70.
13. Johansson, G. (1950). Configurations in event perception. Uppsala, Sweden: Almqvist & Wiksell. Johansson, G. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception & Psychophysics, 14, 201-211.
14. Kozlowski, L. T., & Cutting, J. E. (1977). Recognizing the sex of a walker from a dynamic point-light display. Perception & Psychophysics, 21, 575-580.
15. Marey, E. J. (1972). Movement. New York: Arno Press. (Original work published 1895.)
16. Milner, A.D.,& Goodale,M.A. (1995). The visual brain in action. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17. Proffitt, D. R., Bhalla, M., Gossweiler, R., & Midgett, J. (1995). Perceiving geographical slant. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 409-428.
18. Proffitt, D. R., & Gilden, D. L. (1989). Understanding natural dynamics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 384-393.
19. Runeson, S. (1995). Support for the cue-heuristic model is based on suboptimal observer performance: Response to Gilden and Proffitt (1994). Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 1262-1273.
20. Runeson, S., & Frykholm, G. (1981). Visual perception of lifted weight. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 733-740.
21. Runeson, S., & Frykholm, G. (1983). Kinematic specification of dynamics as informational basis for person and action perception: Expectations, gender recognition, and deceptive intention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 585-615.
22. Runeson, S., & Vedeler, D. (1993). The indispensability of precollision kinematics in the visual perception of relative mass. Perception & Psychophysics, 53, 617-632.
23. Schneider, G. E. (1969). Two visual systems. Science, 895-902.
24. Shim, J., & Carlton, L. G. (1997). Perception of kinematic characteristics in the motion of lifted weight. Journal of Motor Behavior, 29, 131-146.
25. Shim, J., Carlton, L. G., & Kim, J. (2004). Estimation of lifted weight and produced effort through perception of point-light display. Perception, 33, 277-291.
26. Todd, J. T. (1983). Perception of gait. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 31-42.