An imputed dissociation might be an artifact: Further evidence for the generalizability of the observations of Durgin et al. 2010

Acta Psychologica

Volumn 138, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 281-284

  Durgin, Frank H ^a   Hajnal, Alen ^a,b   Li, Zhi ^a   Tonge, Natasha ^a   Stigliani, Anthony ^a  

^a SWARTHMORE COLLEGE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MISSISSIPPI   (United States)

Author keywords

Geographical slant perception; Proprioception; Visually guided action

Indexed keywords

DEPTH PERCEPTION; GESTURE; HAND; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; NOTE; ORIENTATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PROPRIOCEPTION;

GESTURES; HAND; HUMANS; ORIENTATION; PROPRIOCEPTION; RESEARCH DESIGN; SPACE PERCEPTION;

EID: 80053325762     PISSN: 00016918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.09.002     Document Type: Note

References (29)

1. Bhalla M., Proffitt R.D. Visual-motor recalibration in geographical slant perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1999, 25:1076-1096.
2. Braunstein M.L. A better understanding of inference can reconcile constructivist and direct theories [commentary]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2002, 25:99.
3. Bridgeman B., Hoover M. Processing spatial layout by perception and sensorimotor interaction. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2008, 61:851-859.
4. Creem S.H., Proffitt D.R. Two memories for geographical slant: Separation and interdependence of action and awareness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1998, 5:22-36.
5. Creem S.H., Proffitt D.R. Defining the cortical visual systems: "What", "where", and "how". Acta Psychologica 2001, 107:43-68.
6. Durgin F.H. When walking makes perception better. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2009, 18:43-47. 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01603.x.
7. Durgin F.H., Baird J.A., Greenburg M., Russell R., Shaughnessy K., Waymouth S. Who is being deceived? The experimental demands of wearing a backpack. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2009, 16:964-969.
8. Durgin F.H., Hajnal A., Li Z., Tonge N., Stigliani A. Palm boards are not action measures: An alternative to the two-systems theory of geographical slant perception. Acta Psychologica 2010, 134:182-197.
9. Durgin F.H., Li Z. Controlled interaction: Strategies for using virtual reality to study perception. Behavior Research Methods 2010, 42:414-420.
10. Durgin F.H., Li Z., Hajnal A. Slant perception in near space is categorically biased: Evidence for a vertical tendency. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics 2010, 72:1875-1889.
11. Durgin, F. H., Ruff, A., & Russell, R. (in press). Constant enough: On the kinds of perceptual constancy worth having. In G. Hatfield & S. Allred (Eds.) Visual Experience. Oxford University Press.
12. Feresin C., Agostini T. Perception of visual inclination in a real and simulated urban environment. Perception 2007, 36:258-267.
13. Hajnal A., Abdul-Malak D.T., Durgin F.H. The perceptual experience of slope by foot and by finger. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2011, 37:709-719.
14. He Z.J., Hong J., Ooi T.L. On judging surface slant using haptic (palmboard) and verbal-report task [Abstract]. Journal of Vision 2007, 7:282a. http://www.journalofvision.org/7/9/282/. 10.1167/7.9.282.
15. Kammann R. The overestimation of vertical distance and slope and its role in the moon illusion. Perception & Psychophysics 1967, 2:585-589.
16. Kingdom F.A.A. On invariant-sensitive graspers and cue-sensitive perceivers [commentary]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2002, 25:110.
17. Li Z., Durgin F.H. Downhill slopes look shallower from the edge. Journal of Vision 2009, 11(4):1-15.
18. Li, Z., & Durgin, F. H. (2010a). Proprioception of hand orientation (pitch) is calibrated to visual experience. Manuscript submitted for publication.
19. Li Z., Durgin F.H. Perceived slant of binocularly-viewed large-scale surfaces: A common model from explicit and implicit measures. Journal of Vision 2010, 10:1-16.
20. Li Z., Durgin F.H. Design, data and theory regarding a digital hand inclinometer: A portable device for studying slant perception. Behavior Research Method 2011, 43:363-371.
21. Orne M.T. On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications. American Psychologist 1962, 17:776-783.
22. Proffitt D.R. Affordances matter in geographical slant perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2009, 16:970-972.
23. Proffitt D.R., Bhalla M., Gossweiler R., Midgett J. Perceiving geographical slant. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1995, 2:409-428.
24. Proffitt D.R., Zadra J.R. Explicit and motoric dependent measures of geographical slant are dissociable: A reassessment of the findings of Durgin, Hajnal, Li, Tonge, and Stigliani. Acta Psychologica 2010.
25. Ross H.E. Behavior and perception in strange environments 1974, George Allen & Unwin, London.
26. Russell R., Durgin F.H. Demand characteristics, not effort: The role of backpacks in judging distance [abstract]. Journal of Vision 2008, 8:755a. http://www.journalofvision.org/8/6/755/.
27. Schnall S., Harber K.D., Stefanucci J., Proffitt D.R. Social support and the perception of geographical slant. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2008, 44:1246-1255.
28. Schnall S., Zadra J.R., Proffitt D.R. Direct evidence for the economy of action: Glucose and the perception of geographical slant. Perception 2010, 39:464-482.
29. Witt J.K., Proffitt D.R. Perceived slant: A dissociation between perception and action. Perception 2007, 36:249-257.