The facing bias in biological motion erception: Structure, kinematics, and body parts

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 73, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 130-143

  Schouten, Ben ^a   Troje, Nikolaus F ^b   Verfaillie, Karl ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Ambiguity; Biological motion; Depth; Facing bias; Kinematics; Structure

Indexed keywords

ART; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; BIOMECHANICS; CONCEPT FORMATION; DEPTH PERCEPTION; EYE FIXATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; VISUAL ILLUSION;

ATTENTION; BIOMECHANICS; CONCEPT FORMATION; DEPTH PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; FIXATION, OCULAR; HUMAN BODY; HUMANS; MALE; MOTION PERCEPTION; OPTICAL ILLUSIONS; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SEX CHARACTERISTICS;

EID: 79951942272     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-010-0018-1     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. 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.
2. Blake, R., & Shiffrar, M. (2007). Perception of human motion. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 47-73. doi:10.1146/annurev. psych.57.102904.190152
3. Brooks, A., Schouten, B., Troje, N. F., Verfaillie, K., Blanke, O., & van der Zwan, R. (2008). Correlated changes in perceptions of the gender and orientation of ambiguous biological motion figures. Current Biology, 18, R728-R729. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2008.06.054
4. Chang, D. H. F., & Troje, N. F. (2008). Perception of animacy and direction from local biological motion signals. Journal of Vision, 8(5, Art. 10). doi:10.1167/8.5.3
5. Chang, D. H. F., & Troje, N. F. (2009a). Acceleration carries the local inversion effect in biological motion perception. Journal of Vision, 9(1, Art. 17). doi:10.1167/9.1.19
6. Chang, D. H. F., & Troje, N. F. (2009b). Characterizing global and local mechanisms in biological motion perception. Journal of Vision, 9(5, Art. 10). doi:10.1167/9.5.8
7. Cutting, J. E. (1978). Generation of synthetic male and female walkers through manipulation of a biomechanical invariant. Perception, 7, 393-405. doi:10.1068/p070393
8. Gallese, V., Keysers, C., & Rizzolatti, G. (2004). A unifying view of the basis of social cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 396-403. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2004.07.002
9. Giese, M. A., & Poggio, T. (2003). Neural mechanisms for the recognition of biological movements. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 4, 179-192. doi:10.1038/nrn1057
10. Hewig, J., Trippe, R. H., Hecht, H., Straube, T., & Miltner, W. H. R. (2008). Gender differences for specific body regions when looking at men and women. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 32, 67-78. doi:10.1007/s10919-007-0043-5
11. Hiris, E., & Ewing, K. (2010). The perceived sex of biological motion displays is influenced by adaptation to biological motion but not adaptation to static faces. Journal of Vision, 10(7), 781.doi:10.1167/10.7.781 Abstract.
12. Jackson, S., & Blake, R. (2010). Neural integration of information specifying form, motion, and depth. The Journal of Neuroscience, 20, 838-848. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3116-09.2010
13. Jackson, S., Cummins, F., & Brady, N. (2008). Rapid perceptual switching of a reversible biological figure. PLoS ONE, 3, e3982. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003982
14. Johansson, G. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception & Psychophysics, 14, 201-211.
15. Johnson, K. L., & Tassinary, L. G. (2005). Perceiving sex directly and indirectly: Meaning in motion and morphology. Psychological Science, 16, 890-897. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01633.x
16. Jordan, H., Fallah, M., & Stoner, G. R. (2006). Adaptation of gender derived from biological motion. Nature Neuroscience, 9, 738-739. doi:10.1038/nn1710
17. Kozlowski, L. T., & Cutting, J. E. (1977). Recognizing the sex of a walker from a dynamic point-light display. Perception & Psychophysics, 21, 575-580.
18. Mather, G., & Murdoch, L. (1994). Gender discrimination in biological motion displays based on dynamic cues. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, 258, 273-279. doi:10.1098/rspb.1994.0173
19. Pollick, F. E., Kay, J. W., Heim, K., & Stringer, R. (2005). Gender recognition from point-light walkers. Journal of Experimental Psychologyz: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 1247-1265. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.31.6.1247
20. Saunders, D. R., Suchan, J., & Troje, N. F. (2009). Off on the wrong foot: Local features in biological motion. Perception, 38, 522-532. doi:10.1068/p6140
21. Schouten, B., & Verfaillie, K. (2010). Determining the point of subjective ambiguity of ambiguous biological motion figures with perspective cues. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 161-167. doi:10.3758/BRM.42.1.161
22. Schouten, B., Troje, N. F., Brooks, A., van der Zwan, R., & Verfaillie, K. (2010). The facing bias in biological motion perception: Effects of stimulus gender and observer sex. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 1256-1260.
23. Troje, N. F. (2002). Decomposing biological motion: A framework for analyses and synthesis of human gait patterns. Journal of Vision, 2, 371-387. doi:10.1167/2.5.2
24. Troje, N. F. (2008). Retrieving information from human movement patterns. In T. F. Shipley & J. M. Zacks (Eds.), Understanding events: How humans see, represent, and act on events. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Troje, N. F., & Chang, D. H. F. (in press). Shape-invariant processing of biological motion. In K. Johnson & M. Shiffrar (Eds.), Visual perception of the human body in motion: Findings, theory, and practice (pp. 308-335). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Troje, N. F., & Szabo, S. (2006). Why is the average walker male? Sarasota, FL: Poster presented at the Vision Science Society meeting.
27. Troje, N. F., &thoff, C. (2006). The inversion effect in biological motion perception: Evidence for a "life detector"? Current Biology, 16, 821-824. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2006.03.022
28. Troje, N. F., Westhoff, C., & Lavrov, M. (2005). Person identification from biological motion: Effects of structural and kinematic cues. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 667-675.
29. Troje, N. F., Sadr, J., Geyer, H., & Nakayama, K. (2006). Adaptation aftereffects in the perception of gender from biological motion. Journal of Vision, 6(8), 850-857. doi:10.1167/6.8.7
30. van der Zwan, R., Machatch, C., Kozlowski, D., Troje, N. F., Blanke, O., & Brooks, A. (2009). Gender bending: Auditory cues affect visual judgements of gender in biological motion displays. Experimental Brain Research, 198, 373-382. doi:10.1007/s00221-009-1800-y
31. Vangeneugden, J., Pollick, F., & Vogels, R. (2009). Functional differentiation of macaque visual temporal cortical neurons using a parametric action space. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 593-611. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhn109
32. Vanrie, J., & Verfaillie, K. (2006). Perceiving depth in point-light actions. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 601-612.
33. Vanrie, J., & Verfaillie, K. (2008). Perceptual coupling of multiple point-light figures. Visual Cognition, 16, 585-615. doi:10.1080/13506280701269334
34. Vanrie, J. & Verfaillie, K. (2010). On the reversibility of point-light actions. Manuscript submitted for publication.
35. Vanrie, J., Dekeyser, M., & Verfaillie, K. (2004). Bistability and biasing effects in the perception of ambiguous point-light walkers. Perception, 33, 547-560. doi:10.1068/p5004
36. Verfaillie, K. (2000). Perceiving human locomotion: Priming effects in direction discrimination. Brain and Cognition, 44, 192-213. doi:10.1006/brcg.2000.1228
37. Wichmann, F. A., & Hill, N. J. (2001a). The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of Fit. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 1293-1313.
38. Wichmann, F. A., & Hill, N. J. (2001b). The psychometric function: II. Bootstrap-based confidence intervals and sampling. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 1314-1329.