Distance perception mediated through nested contact relations among surfaces

In complex natural scenes, objects at different spatial locations can usually be related to each other through nested contact relations among adjoining surfaces. Our research asks how well human observers, under monocular static viewing conditions, are able to utilize this information in distance perception. We present computer-generated naturalistic scenes of a cube resting on a platform, which is in turn resting on the ground. Observers adjust the location of a marker on the ground to equal the perceived distance of the cube. We find that (1) perceived distance of the cube varies appropriately as the perceived location of contact between the platform and the ground varies; (2) variability increases systematically as the relating surfaces move apart; and (3) certain local edge alignments allow precise propagation of distance information. These results demonstrate considerable efficiency in the mediation of distance perception through nested contact relations among surfaces.     

The ground dominance effect in the perception of relative distance in 3-D scenes is mainly due to characteristics of the ground surface

Previously, we (Bian, Braunstein, and& Andersen, 2005) reported a dominance effect of the ground plane over other environmental surfaces in determining the perceived relative distance of objects in 3-D scenes. In the present study, we conducted three experiments to investigate whether this ground dominance is due to inherent differences between ground and ceiling surfaces, or to the locations of these surfaces in the visual field. In Experiment 1, two vertical posts were positioned between a ground surface and a ceiling surface, and optical contact was manipulated so that the two surfaces provided contradictory information about the relative distances of the posts from the participant. The two surfaces were either both above, both below, or one above and one below fixation. In Experiment 2, only one surface was presented, either above, below, or at fixation. In Experiment 3, the posts were replaced by two red dots, and the eccentricity of the optical contact on the two surfaces was equated in each of five locations in the visual field. In all three experiments, participants judged which of the two objects appeared to be closer. Overall, we found a higher proportion of judgments consistent with a ground surface than with a ceiling surface in all locations, indicating that the ground dominance effect is mainly due to characteristics of the ground surface, with location in the visual field having only a minor effect.     

Action relations, semantic relations, and familiarity of spatial position in Balint’s syndrome: Crossover effects on perceptual report and on localization

We contrasted effects of the action relationship between objects, relative to effects of semantic relation and familiarity of spatial location, in a patient with Balint’s syndrome. We found enhanced perceptual report of objects placed in the correct colocations for action in comparison with when the objects (1) were placed in incorrect locations for action (Experiment 1), (2) were associatively related (Experiment 2), or (3) fell in familiar locations but were not action related (Experiment 4). In contrast, the ability to localize the objects was affected by whether the objects were in familiar as opposed to unfamiliar locations with respect to one another. Action relations between objects facilitate joint attention to both objects but do not facilitate binding to location. Familiar spatial relations facilitate spatial binding, but do not cue joint attention to the stimuli. Effects of action relation on attention and localization can be dissociated from effects of semantic relationship and familiarity of spatial location on attention and localization.     

Contribution of extraretinal signals to the scaling of object distance during self-motion

We investigated the role of extraretinal information in the perception of absolute distance. In a computer-simulated environment, monocular observers judged the distance of objects positioned at different locations in depth while performing frontoparallel movements of the head. The objects were spheres covered with random dots subtending three different visual angles. Observers viewed the objects ateye level, either in isolation or superimposed on a ground floor. The distance and size of the spheres were covaried to suppress relative size information. Hence, the main cues to distance were the motion parallax and the extraretinal signals. In three experiments, we found evidence that (1) perceived distance is correlated with simulated distance in terms of precision and accuracy, (2) the accuracy in the distance estimate is slightly improved by the presence of a ground-floor surface, (3) the perceived distance is not altered significantly when the visual field size increases, and (4) the absolute distance is estimated correctly during self-motion. Conversely, stationary subjects failed to report absolute distance when they passively observed a moving object producing the same retinal stimulation, unless they could rely on knowledge of the three-dimensional movements.     

Judging distance across texture discontinuities

Sinai et al (1998 Nature 395 497-500) showed that less distance is perceived along a ground surface that spans two differently textured regions than along a surface that is uniformly textured. We examined the effect of texture continuity on judged distance using computer-generated displays of simulated surfaces in five experiments. Discontinuities were produced by using different textures, the same texture reversed in contrast, or the same texture shifted horizontally. The simulated surface was either a ground plane or a frontoparallel plane. For all textures and both orientations, less distance was judged in the discontinuous conditions than in continuous conditions. We propose that when a surface contains a texture discontinuity, a small area adjacent to the perceived boundary is excluded from judged distances.     

Object perception and object-directed reaching in infancy

Five-month-old infants were presented with a small object, a larger object, and a background surface arranged in depth so that all were within reaching distance. Patterns of reaching for this display were observed, while spatial and kinetic properties of the display were varied. When the infants reached for the display, they did not reach primarily for the surfaces that were nearer, smaller, or presented in motion. The infants reached, instead, for groups of surfaces that formed a unit that was spatially connected and/or that moved as a whole relative to its surroundings. Infants reached for the nearer of two objects as a distinct unit when the objects were separated in depth or when one object moved relative to the other. They reached for the two objects as a single unit when the objects were adjacent or when they moved together. The reaching patterns provided evidence that the infants organized each display into the kind of units that adults call objects: manipulable units with internal coherence and external boundaries. Infants, like adults, perceived objects by detecting both the spatial arrangements and the relative movements of surfaces in the three-dimensional layout.     

Perceiving binocular depth with reference to a common surface

A common surface is a spatial regularity of our terrestrial environment. For instance, we walk on the common ground surface, lay a variety of objects on the table top, and display our favorite paintings on the wall. It has been proposed that the visual system utilizes this regularity as a reference frame for coding objects' distances. Presumably, by treating the common surface as such--i.e. an anticipated constant--the visual system can reduce its coding redundancy, and divert its resources to representing other information. For intermediate-distance space perception, it has been found that absolute distance judgment is most accurate when a common ground surface is available. Here we explored if the common surface also serves as the reference frame for the processing of binocular-disparity information, which is a predominant cue for near-distance space perception. We capitalized on an established observation where the perceived slant of a surface with linear binocular-disparity gradient is underestimated. Clearly, if the visual system utilizes this incorrectly represented slant surface as a reference frame for coding the objects' locations, the perceived depth separation between the objects will be adversely affected. Our results confirm this, by showing that the depth judgment of objects (two laterally separated vertical lines) on, or in the vicinity of, the surface is underestimated. Furthermore, we show that the impact of the common surface on perceived depth separation most likely occurs at the surface-representation level where the visual surface has been explicitly delineated, rather than at the earlier disparity-processing level.     

Background surface and horizon effects in the perception of relative size and distance

The projected height of an object in a scene relative to a ground surface influences its perceived size and distance, but the effect of height should change when the object is moved above the horizon. In four experiments, observers judged relative size or relative distance for pairs of objects varying in height with respect to the horizon. Higher objects equal in projected size were judged larger below the horizon, but the relative size effect was reversed either when one object was on the horizon and one was above the horizon or when both objects were above the horizon. With the real horizon not explicitly present in the display, relative size judgements were affected both by the boundary of the visible surface and the vanishing point implied by the converging lines. For relative distance judgements, the higher object was judged more distant regardless of the height of the objects relative to the perceptual horizon, resulting in a reversal of the relation between size and distance judgements for objects above the horizon.     

Distance perception from motion parallax and ground contact

Meng and Sedgwick (2001, 2002) found that the perceived distance of an object in a stationary scene was determined by the position at which it contacted the ground in the image, or by nested contact relations among intermediate surfaces. Three experiments investigated whether motion parallax would allow observers to determine the distance of a floating object without intermediate contact relations. The displays consisted of one or more computer-generated textured cylinders inserted into a motion picture or still image of an actual 3-D scene. In the motion displays, both the cylinders and the scene translated horizontally. Judged distance for a single cylinder floating above the ground was determined primarily by the location at which the object contacted the ground in the projected image (“optical contact”), but was altered in the direction indicated by motion parallax. When more than one cylinder was present and observers were asked to judge the distance of the top cylinder, judged distance moved closer to that indicated by motion parallax, almost matching that value with three cylinders. These results indicate that judged distance in a dynamic scene is affected both by optical contact and motion parallax, with motion parallax more effective when multiple objects are present.     

When here becomes there: attentional distribution modulates foveal bias in peripheral localization

Much research concerning attention has focused on changes in the perceptual qualities of objects while attentional states were varied. Here, we address a complementary question--namely, how perceived location can be altered by the distribution of sustained attention over the visual field. We also present a new way to assess the effects of distributing spatial attention across the visual field. We measured magnitude judgments relative to an aperture edge to test perceived location across a large range of eccentricities (30°), and manipulated spatial uncertainty in target locations to examine perceived location under three different distributions of spatial attention. Across three experiments, the results showed that changing the distribution of sustained attention significantly alters known foveal biases in peripheral localization.     

The visual system prioritizes locations near corners of surfaces (not just locations near a corner)

When a new visual object appears, attention is directed toward it. However, some locations along the outline of the new object may receive more resources, perhaps as a consequence of their relative importance in describing its shape. Evidence suggests that corners receive enhanced processing, relative to the straight edges of an outline (corner enhancement effect). Using a technique similar to that in an original study in which observers had to respond to a probe presented near a contour (Cole et al. in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 27:1356–1368, 2001), we confirmed this effect. When figure–ground relations were manipulated using shaded surfaces (Exps. 1 and 2) and stereograms (Exps. 3 and 4), two novel aspects of the phenomenon emerged: We found no difference between corners perceived as being convex or concave, and we found that the enhancement was stronger when the probe was perceived as being a feature of the surface that the corner belonged to. Therefore, the enhancement is not based on spatial aspects of the regions in the image, but critically depends on figure–ground stratification, supporting the link between the prioritization of corners and the representation of surface layout.     

Perceiving and Imagining Plato's Solids: The Generalized Cylinder in Spatial Organization of 3D Structures

The regular polyhedra, commonly known as the “Platonic solids”, are fundamental three-dimensional structures. It is known that the ease of imagining one of these solids, the cube, varies radically with its orientation to the vertical. We demonstrate the same variation for perception and imagination of all three of the simpler Platonic solids: The cube, octahedron, and tetrahedron. In orientations of the objects that are relatively easy to comprehend, the objects are generalized cylinders about the vertical. In the difficult orientations, the objects are antiprismatic about the vertical. The critical difference between these structures is that generalized cylinders have uniform orientations of edges and surfaces about an object axis while antiprisms have nonuniform orientations. These results support strongly the view that the orientations of objectfeatures are important in spatial organization, that humans are highly sensitive to objective forms of regularity in spatial organization, and that the generalized cylinder is a form of spatial regularity that people find simple.     

Developmental Changes in Young Children's Spatial Memory and Language in Relation to Landmarks

Two experiments investigated how young children and adults understand whether objects are by a landmark and remember their locations. Three- and 4-year-old children and adults were asked to judge whether several blocks were by a landmark. The blocks were arranged so that their absolute and relative distances from the landmark varied. Later, the blocks were removed, and participants were asked to place them in their original locations. All ages relied on relative distance between objects and a landmark when making by judgments; however, older children and adults showed systematic judgments. Relative distance also affected block placement, and systematicity increased across development. Children's understanding of the relative nature of by and their ability to remember locations precisely increased during the preschool years, indicating developmental changes in the adaptive combination of location cues for spatial language and memory.     

Holding an object one is looking at: Kinesthetic information on the object’s distance does not improve visual judgments of its size

Visual judgments of distance are often inaccurate. Nevertheless, information on distance must be procured if retinal image size is to be used to judge an object’s dimensions. In the present study, we examined whether kinesthetic information about an object’s distance—based on the posture of the arm and hand when holding it—influences the object’s perceived size. Subjects were presented with a computer simulation of a cube. This cube’s position was coupled to that of a rod in the subject’s hand. Its size was varied between presentations. Subjects had to judge whether the cube they saw was larger than, smaller than, or the same size as a reference. On some presentations, a small difference was introduced between the positions of the rod and of the simulated cube. When the simulated cube was slightly closer than the rod, subjects judged the cube to be larger. When it was farther away, they judged it to be smaller. We show that these changes in perceived size are due to alterations in the cube’s distance from the subject rather than to kinesthetic information.     

Spatial updating relies on an egocentric representation of space: Effects of the number of objects

Models of spatial updating attempt to explain how representations of spatial relationships between the actor and objects in the environment change as the actor moves. In allocentric models, object locations are encoded in an external reference frame, and only the actor’s position and orientation in that reference frame need to be updated. Thus, spatial updating should be independent of the number of objects in the environment (set size). In egocentric updating models, object locations are encoded relative to the actor, so the location of each object relative to the actor must be updated as the actor moves. Thus, spatial updating efficiency should depend on set size. We examined which model better accounts for human spatial updating by having people reconstruct the locations of varying numbers of virtual objects either from the original study position or from a changed viewing position. In consistency with the egocentric updating model, object localization following a viewpoint change was affected by the number of objects in the environment.     

A Possible Connection between Categorical and Coordinate Spatial Relation Representations

Kosslyn (1987) theorized that the visual system uses two types of spatial relations. Categorical spatial relations represent a range of locations as an equivalence class, whereas coordinate spatial relations represent the precise distance between two objects. Data indicate a left hemisphere (LH) advantage for processing categorical spatial relations and a right hemisphere (RH) advantage for processing coordinate spatial relations. Although generally assumed to be independent processes, this article proposes a possible connection between categorical and coordinate spatial relations. Specifically, categorical spatial relations may be an initial stage in the formation of coordinate spatial relations. Three experiments tested the hypothesis that categorical information would benefit tasks that required coordinate judgments. Experiments 1 and 2 presented categorical information before participants made coordinate judgments and coordinate information before participants made categorical judgments. Categorical information sped the processing of a coordinate task under a range of experimental variables; however, coordinate information did not benefit categorical judgments. Experiment 3 used this priming paradigm to present stimuli in the left or right visual field. Although visual field differences were present in the third experiment, categorical information did not speed the processing of a coordinate task. The lack of priming effects in Experiment 3 may have been due to methodological changes. In general, support is provided that categorical spatial relations may act as an initial step in the formation of more precise distance representations, i.e., coordinate spatial relations.     

Reaching beyond spatial perception: Effects of intended future actions on visually guided prehension

Three experiments examined whether manipulating actors' intentions, regarding forthcoming actions, influences the time course and kinematics of visually guided, reach‐to‐grasp movements. Subjects performed two‐step action sequences where the initial movement always involved reaching for and grasping cubes located at a constant distance. Demands of the second movement were systematically manipulated. Although the spatial parameters (cube size and distance) remained constant across all conditions, the durations of the initial movements differed substantially depending on the actions subjects intended to perform once the objects were in hand. Less time was required to engage a small (1 cm³) cube when the intention was to transport it to a new location on the workspace vs. a large (4 cm³) cube when the goal was to merely lift it above its current resting position (Experiment 1). This difference in duration of the initial movement reflects more time spent in the deceleration phase of the reach when the task does not require transporting the cube to a new location on the workspace. Further, this context effect is not related to accuracy demands (Experiment 2), or complexity (Experiment 3) of the intended second movement. These findings demonstrate that actions are determined both by the perceived spatial demands of the immediate movement as well as the intended goal of the entire action sequence.     

How Body Asymmetries Determine Accessibility in Spatial Frameworks

Spatial frameworks are a class of spatial mentalmodel that code locations of objects relative to the body axes. Spatial frameworks predict accessibility of spatial relations from memory primarily on the basis of the relative asymmetry of the body axes, such that highly asymmetric axes lead to faster retrieval of information. The present research examined how bodily asymmetries affect retrieval. Experiment 1 contrasted two theoretical accounts. The Salience Account proposes that relative degrees of asymmetry render axes differentially salient, and hence differentially foregrounded in one's mental model. The Direction Decision Account proposes that an explicit decision process is necessary to access specific locations along body axes. The ease of the decision process presumably depends on the degree of asymmetry that exists to discriminate poles along a body axis. The spatial framework pattern of accessibility was observed both when subjects identified specific directions of objects and when subjects identified just the axis to which objects were associated, supporting the Salience Account. Experiment 2 investigated whether lateralization affects accessibility from spatial frameworks. Performance of highly lateralized individuals did not differ from that of weakly lateralized individuals.