Effect of distance instructions on size judgments

The proposition that in a reduced-cue setting subjects could use cognitive information about an object's distance to make accurate judgments of its size was tested. An improved paradigm was used to determine the effects of distance instructions per se. This paradigm also allowed independent tests of the effectiveness of cue reduction. The data indicated that cue reduction was successful and that the specific distance tendency governed size judgments when there were no distance instructions. When distance instructions were given, they produced size judgments in precisely the ratio predicted by the size-distance invariance hypothesis. However, there was a large constant error, which reflects a tendency of college students to overestimate the amount of distance signified by a verbal instruction. Hence, cognitive information in the form of verbal distance instructions has precise effects on size judgments, but the latter are not veridical, even in the absence of anchor effects from the specific distance tendency and residual perceptual cues.     

The role of instructions and familiar size in absolute judgments of size and distance

The effects of familiar size and instructions (apparent, objective) on direct reports of size and distance were evaluated. Subjects estimated the size and distance of two different-sized playing cards or two unfamiliar stimuli under either apparent or objective instructions. The stimuli were presented successively at a distance of 5.48 m under reduced-cue conditions. The form of the instructions selectively influenced the effect of familiar size on absolute judgments of size and distance, with apparent instructions minimizing, and objective instructions promoting, familiar-size effects. The ratio of the distance judgments of the first to the second presented stimuli approximated the relative retinal sizes of the two objects under both apparent and objective instructions, while the ratio of size judgments tended to be either influenced by or independent of the object’s relative retinal sizes under apparent and objective instructions, respectively. These results are consistent with Gogel’s theory of off-size perception and, in particular, with the claim that, in comparison with apparent instructions, objective instructions are more likely to direct observers to base their judgments on cognitive, as opposed to perceptual, sources of spatial information.     

The role of instructions and familiar size in absolute judgments of size and distance.

The effects of familiar size and instructions (apparent, objective) on direct reports of size and distance were evaluated. Subjects estimated the size and distance of two different-sized playing cards or two unfamiliar stimuli under either apparent or objective instructions. The stimuli were presented successively at a distance of 5.48 m under reduced-cue conditions. The form of the instructions selectively influenced the effect of familiar size on absolute judgments of size and distance, with apparent instructions minimizing, and objective instructions promoting, familiar-size effects. The ratio of the distance judgments of the first to the second presented stimuli approximated the relative retinal sizes of the two objects under both apparent and objective instructions, while the ratio of size judgments tended to be either influenced by or independent of the object's relative retinal sizes under apparent and objective instructions, respectively. These results are consistent with Gogel's theory of off-size perception and, in particular, with the claim that, in comparison with apparent instructions, objective instructions are more likely to direct observers to base their judgments on cognitive, as opposed to perceptual, sources of spatial information.     

Quantitative functions for size and distance judgments

A psychophysical approach was used to obtain judgments of visual extent under three conditions. In tuvo conditions a comparison stimulus at each of two distances was matched in size to a standard which varied in distance. Stimuli were presented on a well-lighted table and were judged by two observers under Objective instructions. Both the standard and comparison were located in either a frontal or longitudinal plane. In a third condition relative distance estimates were given of two stimuli which varied in their relative positions along the table. The mean results for all conditions were described as a power function of physical stimulus measures. The exponent was greater than 1.0 for frontal size and usually less than 1.0 for flat size and distance. The position of the comparison affected the magnitude of the exponents to a lesser degree. These findings have relevance for interpretations of size and distance judgments.     

Lighting position and judgments of distance of shadow-casting objects.

Participants recruited on the web performed in two experiments in which they viewed eight pictures of the same two rods in the exact same positions with shadows generated by a light source located at eight positions around the rods. In Exp. 1, participants judged how much shadows projected to the front, back, and sides of the rods facilitated the correct perception of the actual distance of the rods relative to each other. In Exp. 1 (n: 52), frontal lighting facilitated judgments more than lighting from the rear, but frontal and side lighting did not differ in facilitative effects. In Exp. 2 (n: 72), judgments of rods depicted with shadows were relative to a judgment of the rods depicted without shadows (raw scores were the value of the judgment of the shadowless rods subtracted from the value of the judgment of each of the eight sets of rods). Again, frontal lighting was more facilitative than rear lighting and frontal lighting did not differ from side lighting. However, when the average of each participant's backlighting judgments was compared with his judgment of the shadowless rods, shadows generated by backlighting were more facilitative than none.     

Effects of distance between objects and distance from the vertical axis on shape identity judgments

In three experiments, we independently manipulated the angular disparity between objects to be compared and the angular distance between the central axis of the objects and the vertical axis in a mental rotation paradigm. There was a linear increase in reaction times that was attributable to both factors. This result held whether the objects were rotated (with respect to each other and to the upright) within the frontal-parallel plane (Experiment 1) or in depth (Experiment 2), although the effects of both factors were greater for objects rotated in depth than for objects rotated within the frontal-parallel plane (Experiment 3). In addition, the factors interacted when the subjects had to search for matching ends of the figures (Experiments 1 and 2), but they were additive when the ends that matched were evident (Experiment 3). These data may be interpreted to mean that subjects normalize or reference an object with respect to the vertical upright as well as compute the rotational transformations used to determine shape identity.     

Relative distance judgments of familiar and unfamiliar objects viewed under representatively natural conditions

Carlson and Tassone (1971) reported that an object of familiar size viewed at an appreciable distance is perceived to be more distant than an unfamiliar object. Six experiments were designed to examine this effect. The results indicated that the effect is not dependent on Carlson and Tassone's method for assessing perceived relative distance; it occurs at some minimum viewing distance; it is unlikely to be caused by stimulus attributes confounded with the familiar versus unfamiliar size dichotomy; appears to be specific to judgments of the familiar object itself; and it does not occur if the familiar and unfamiliar objects have a common reference target. These findings are discussed with respect to the issue of whether familiar size influences perceived distance as distinct from influencing judgments of distance.     

The time it takes to make veridical size and distance judgments

Two experiments measuring the time it takes to make veridical size judgments under normal (unreduced) conditions of viewing showed that RT tended to increase with increases in viewing distance between 122 and 305 cm, even for targets subtending the same visual angle at all distances. Two experiments measuring the time it takes to judge distance under the same conditions did not reveal any difference in RT as a function of the extent-of-distance judged. Established accounts of size perception do not suggest an explanation of these findings.     

The influence of haptic size information upon visual judgments of absolute distance

When O views a blank triangle of light under completely reduced conditions, he is able to use information about the size of this visual stimulus conveyed via the haptic modality when he is attempting to judge the absolute distance of the visual stimulus. However, distance is consistently underesti-mated in this situation. When haptically-indicated size is held constant, judged distance varies inversely with retinalsubtense, even though the different retinal subtenses are viewed by different Os. A variant of the size-distance invariance hypothesis also appears to hold in these circumstances.     

The effect of verbal size information upon visual judgments of absolute distance

When an 0 views a blank triangle of light under completely reduced conditions, he is able to make use of verbally conveyed information about the size of this stimulus when he is attempting to judge the absolute distance of the stimulus. Although between-Os variance is rather large in this situation, group mean distance estimates are highly veridical. This is further evidence for the view that, when the 0 is given a retinal subtense, any kind of information about size enables him to make a judgment of absolute distance, just as information about distance enables him to make a judgment of absolute size.     

The effects of familiar size on judgments of size and distance: An interaction of viewing attitude with spatial cues

Two hypotheses about the effects of familiar size on judgments of size and distance, the cue-conflict hypothesis and the viewing-attitude hypothesis, were examined. In Experiment 1, observers estimated the size and distance of familiar targets with apparent or assumptive instructions under three different spatial cue conditions. In Experiment 2, observers performed tasks similar to those of Experiment 1 with no specific instructions. The main results were: (1) Assumptive instructions facilitate the effects of familiar size in both size and distance judgments, but reducing spatial cues does not, and (2) viewing attitude changes from the apparent to the assumptive when available spatial cues are reduced. Thus, it was concluded that the viewing-attitude hypothesis gives a better account of the effects of familiar size, but that the cue-conflict hypothesis cannot be abandoned, because the number of conflicting cues contributes to the formation of viewing attitude.