Search

In his extensive writing about pictures, James J. Gibson offered perspective formulae for square tiles projecting trapezoids onto a picture plane, foreshortening to zero height with distance. I reverse the claim: as distance decreases, the trapezoids increase to infinite height, in marginal distortion, or forelengthening. I also reverse the direction of projection. Usually considered to be incoming, from the distant tile to the picture plane, in reverse—outgoing—the tiles have directions from the center of projection, with implications for haptics and people who are blind. A drawing of a cube illustrates the argument. It is by an adult who is blind. It includes foreshortening, and shows directions of surfaces from a vantage point. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Everyday movements are guided by objects' positions relative to other items in the scene (allocentric information) as well as by objects' positions relative to oneself (egocentric information). Allocentric information can guide movements to the remembered positions of hidden objects, but is it also used when the object remains visible? To stimulate the use of allocentric information, the position of the participant's finger controlled the velocity of a cursor that they used to intercept moving targets, so there was no one-to-one mapping between egocentric positions of the hand and cursor. We evaluated whether participants relied on allocentric information by shifting all task-relevant items simultaneously leaving their allocentric relationships unchanged. If participants rely on allocentric information they should not respond to this perturbation. However, they did. They responded in accordance with their responses to each item shifting independently, supporting the idea that fast guidance of ongoing movements primarily relies on egocentric information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Visual perception is not always veridical but can be influenced by factors such as ease of acting, energetic cost, and even body type of the observer. This notion is called action-specific perception. Several effects of action capability on visual perception have been found, but there is much controversy as to whether these effects are truly perceptual. Because perception cannot be measured directly, resolving the controversy relies on ruling out alternative explanations through systematic testing. We combined one of the most robust action-specific effects (the Pong effect) with one of the primary suggestions for exploring an alternative explanation, namely whether the effect persists across instructions that emphasize different aspects of the task. The Pong effect was robust to the type of instructions. The results provide critical evidence that the Pong effect is truly perceptual, furthering the argument that a person's ability to act can influence visual perception. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We expect a cursor to move upwards when we push our computer mouse away. Do we expect it to move upwards on the screen, upwards with respect to our body, or upwards with respect to gravity? To find out, we asked participants to perform a simple task that involved guiding a cursor with a mouse. It took participants that were sitting upright longer to reach targets with the cursor if the screen was tilted, so not only directions on the screen are relevant. Tilted participants' performance was indistinguishable from that of upright participants when the screen was tilted slightly in the same direction. Thus, the screen's orientation with respect to both the body and gravity are relevant. Considering published estimates of the ocular counter-roll induced by head tilt, it is possible that participants actually expect the cursor to move in a certain direction on their retina. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When intercepting a moving target, we typically rely on vision to determine where the target is and where it will soon be. The accuracy of visually guided interception can be represented by a model that combines the perceived position and velocity of the target to estimate when and where to hit it and guides the finger accordingly with a short delay. We might expect the accuracy of interception to similarly depend on haptic judgments of position and velocity. To test this, we conducted separate experiments to measure the precision and any biases in tactile perception of position and velocity and used our findings to predict the precision and biases that would be present in an interception task if it were performed according to the principle described earlier. We then performed a tactile interception task to test our predictions. We found that interception of tactile targets is guided by similar principles as interception of visual targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]