Spatial judgments of exocentric extents in an open-field situation: familiar versus unfamiliar size.

Carlson and Tassone (1971) found that an object of familiar size presented in an outdoor setting and viewed at an appreciable distance is judged to be more distant than an unfamiliar object. Three experiments examined whether object familiarity also affects spatial judgments of exocentric extents presented under conditions comparable to those of Carlson and Tassone's experiments. The markers of the extents were either familiar or unfamiliar objects. In Experiment 1, subjects reproduced the perceived extents of depth intervals by adjusting a comparison egocentric extent, and in Experiment 2, subjects also compared the relative depths of two equally long extents. In Experiment 3, the two equally long extents were presented in the subjects' frontoparallel plane, and the subjects reported which of these two extents appeared longer and farther away. The results of these experiments indicate that familiar size does not affect the perceived depths or lengths of exocentric extents viewed under naturalistic conditions.     

Spatial judgments of exocentric extents in an open-field situation: Familiar versus unfamiliar size

Carlson and Tassone (1971) found that an object of familiar size presented in an outdoor setting and viewed at an appreciable distance is judged to be more distant than an unfamiliar object. Three experiments examined whether object familiarity also affects spatial judgments of exocentric extents presented under conditions comparable to those of Carlson and Tassone’s experiments. The markers of the extents were either familiar or unfamiliar objects. In Experiment 1, subjects reproduced the perceived extents of depth intervals by adjusting a comparison egocentric extent, and in Experiment 2, subjects also compared the relative depths of two equally long extents. In Experiment 3, the two equally long extents were presented in the subjects’ frontoparallel plane, and the subjects reported which of these two extents appeared longer and farther away. The results of these experiments indicate that familiar size does not affect the perceived depths or lengths of exocentric extents viewed under naturalistic conditions.     

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 influence of object familiarity on magnitude estimates of apparent size.

Three magnitude-estimation experiments were used to determine the exponents of the power function relating size judgments and physical size for two-dimensional familiar and unfamiliar stimuli. The exponent of the power function was used to index the effect of familiar size on perceived size under a variety of conditions, from full-cue to reduced-cue viewing conditions. Although the value of the exponents varied across the three experiments, within each experiment the exponent of the familiar stimulus was not significantly different from that of the unfamiliar stimulus, indicating that familiar size does not influence the rate of growth of perceived size. The results of a fourth experiment excluded a possible explanation of the findings of experiments 1-3 in terms of subjects responding to relative angular size as a consequence of the successive presentation of the different-sized representations of the familiar stimulus. Taken together, the present findings are consistent with the hypothesis that the influence of familiar size on estimates of size mainly reflects the intrusion of nonperceptual processes in spatial responses.     

Role of familiar size in spatial judgments under natural viewing conditions.

The purpose of the present experiment was to examine the role of familiar size in judgments of size and egocentric distance under natural (non-reduced) viewing conditions. Independent groups (ns = 14) judged normal and large off-size chairs and control objects presented at a distance of 25.6 m. Subjects also judged the size of unfamiliar objects (adjacent stimuli) attached to the chairs and stakes. The results indicate that the effects of familiar size are specific to spatial judgments of the familiar object itself since judgments of the adjacent stimuli were unaffected by familiar size.     

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.     

Perceived size of familiar objects and the theory of off-sized perceptions

In three experiments, I examined the claim (Gogel, 1969; Gogel & Newton 1969)that familiar objects viewed under reduced stimulus conditions frequently appear to be off-sized (i.e., larger or smaller.than normal). In Experiments 1 and 2, I presented images ofdifferent familiar objects, one at a time, at distances of .1. and 2 m from the observers. The images were normal-, large-, or small-sized versions of familiar objects, and the observers judged the perceived size of each object rela.tive to its familiar normal size. In Experiment 3, I presented normal-, large-, and small-sized versions of thesame familiar object at physical distances of 1 and 2 m. The pattern of size results was similar across the three experiments. In general, normal-sized objects appeared normal to small-sized at the 1-mdistance and small-sized at the 2-mdistance; small-sized objects appeared small-sized at the 1-m distance and even smaller at the 2-m distance; and large-sized objects appeared normal- to large-sized at the 1-m distance and normal- to small-sized at the 2-m distance. The distance results of Experiment 3 indicated that familiar size was an effective determinant of reported distance. These results are consistent with Gogel’s theory of off-sized perceptions and, more generally, with the claim that familiar size is not an important determinant of perceived size.     

An indirect method of measuring perceived distance from familiar size

Two methods of measuring perceived distance as a function of familiar size were compared in five experiments. The method which uses the perception of motion concomitant with a motion of the head, unlike the method of verbal report, is considered to provide a measure of perceived distance that is unaffected by factors of cognitive distance. The results of the experiments indicate that although the perceived egocentric distance of an object can vary somewhat as a function of the cue of familiar size, the larger variation often found with verbal reports of distance is based upon cognitive, not perceptual, information. The cognitive information is interpreted as resulting from the perception of the object as off-sized and the observer’s assumption that the perceived size of an object will vary inversely with its physical distance.     

The role of suggested size in distance responses

A number of studies have concluded that suggested size can modify perceived size, as indicated by the effect on perceived distance. At least this effect seems to occur when verbal reports are used as the measure of the judged distance of the target. The present study supports a different explanation of this phenomenon. It is hypothesized that suggested size can result in the judgment that the target is larger or smaller than normal (an off-sized judgment) where normal is specified by the suggested size. Because the observer expects that a target judged as a small or large off-sized object must be at a greater or lesser distance, respectively. than its perceived distance, the off-sized judgment can provide a cognitive modification of reported distance. This explanation was tested by measuring the perceived distance of targets using a procedure (called the head motion procedure) that, in contrast with verbal reports of distance, is very unlikely to be influenced by off-sized judgments. Measures obtained with the head motion procedure, unlike those obtained from verbal reports, did not change with changes in the suggested size. It is concluded that the size suggestions had a cognitive, not a perceptual, effect on responses to the distance (and size) of the targets.     

Distance judgments under different size-information conditions

Seventy-two Ss judged the absolute distance of a target presented without distance cues other than retinal size and assumed size. The method by which E communicated information about the size of a 3-in. target had a significant effect on the magnitude of the discrepancy between judged distance and the perceived distance required by the size-distance invariance hypothesis. In order of increasing effectiveness in producing distance judgments meeting invariance requirements were: size information in the form of verbally communicated metric units, size information communicated by labeling the target with the name of a familiar object, and size information in the form of a visual representation.     

Perceived size and distance as a perceptual conflict between two processing modes

Three different sized squares were successively presented at the same physical distance under three observational conditions which provided different information about distance in the visual field. The 60 observers in each observational condition were asked to give verbal absolute judgments of perceived size and perceived distance for each of the squares. The results showed that in a full-cue situation a ratio of perceived absolute sizes is equal to that of the corresponding visual angles, with perceived distances appearing equal to each other; in a reduced-cue situation an object of smaller perceived size is judged to be farther away than one of larger perceived size, with the observers tending to assume the two objects as the same object or identically sized objects. These results were analyzed in terms of the perceptual conflict between primary perception and secondary perception.     

The effects of binocular and motion-generated information on the perception of depth and height

The perception of distance and size in the presence of optical gradient information was investigated under four viewing conditions—binocular view with and without head motion, and monocular view with and without head motion. Subjects (60 adults) matched distance intervals (from 15 to 127 cm) and heights of a target triangle (from 5 to 15 cm) by adjusting the length of a metal tape. Both linear and power functions were fitted to each individual’s distance judgments, and the competing perceptual models were compared. For both models, it was found that binocular information was sufficient to specify relative, but not absolute, distance, that monocular information was sufficient to specify an orderly relation between target distance and judgment but not absolute distance, that average error was less in the binocular conditions, and that perceived distance was not affected in either condition by the addition of head motion. The analysis of size judgments revealed that monocular and binocular judgments did not differ, that matches made with and without head motion did not differ, and that, in all conditions, matches exceeded target heights by an average 30% to 40%. Judged size was also analyzed as a function of target distance. In all conditions but monocular view with head motion, the effect of distance was to increase size judgments. The distance judgments support the hypothesis (Purdy, 1958) that the binocular stimulus carries information that the monocular stimulus does not; they fail to support the hypothesis (Gibson, 1966) that observer motion adds information to the static stimulus. The size judgments support neither hypothesis but suggest an independence of perceived size from perceived distance.     

The perception of size and distance under monocular observation

A relative-perceived-size hypothesis is proposed to account for the perception of size and distance under monocular observation in reduced-cue settings. This hypothesis is based on two assumptions. In primary processing, perceived size is determined by both proximal stimulation on the retina and distance information from primary cues such as oculomotor cues. In secondary processing, the relation of two primary perceived sizes determines another relation of secondary perceived distances, so that an object of smaller primary perceived size is judged to be further away. An experiment was designed to test this hypothesis, especially the assumption of secondary processing, by making ratio judgments of perceived size and perceived distance for two successively presented targets. The Standard square was presented at a constant distance and varied in visual angle; the variable square was presented with a constant visual angle in distance. The results showed that an inverse relation between size and distance estimates held regardless of whether the visual angles of the targets were the same or different.     

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.     

More than just perception–action recalibration: Walking through a virtual environment causes rescaling of perceived space

Egocentric distances in virtual environments are commonly underperceived by up to 50 % of the intended distance. However, a brief period of interaction in which participants walk through the virtual environment while receiving visual feedback can dramatically improve distance judgments. Two experiments were designed to explore whether the increase in postinteraction distance judgments is due to perception–action recalibration or the rescaling of perceived space. Perception–action recalibration as a result of walking interaction should only affect action-specific distance judgments, whereas rescaling of perceived space should affect all distance judgments based on the rescaled percept. Participants made blind-walking distance judgments and verbal size judgments in response to objects in a virtual environment before and after interacting with the environment through either walking (Experiment 1) or reaching (Experiment 2). Size judgments were used to infer perceived distance under the assumption of size–distance invariance, and these served as an implicit measure of perceived distance. Preinteraction walking and size-based distance judgments indicated an underperception of egocentric distance, whereas postinteraction walking and size-based distance judgments both increased as a result of the walking interaction, indicating that walking through the virtual environment with continuous visual feedback caused rescaling of the perceived space. However, interaction with the virtual environment through reaching had no effect on either type of distance judgment, indicating that physical translation through the virtual environment may be necessary for a rescaling of perceived space. Furthermore, the size-based distance and walking distance judgments were highly correlated, even across changes in perceived distance, providing support for the size–distance invariance hypothesis.     

The perception of interleaved melodies

If the notes of two melodies whose pitch ranges do not overlap are interleaved in time so that successive tones come from the different melodies, the resulting sequence of tones is perceptually divided into groups that correspond to the two melodies. Such “melodic fission” demonstrates perceptual grouping based on pitch alone, and has been used extensively in music.Experiment I showed that the identification of interleaved pairs of familiar melodies is possible if their pitch ranges do not overlap, but difficult otherwise. A short-term recognition-memory paradigm (Expt II) showed that interleaving a “background” melody with an unfamiliar melody interferes with same-different judgments regardless of the separation of their pitch ranges, but that range separation attenuates the interference effect. When pitch ranges overlap, listeners can overcome the interference effect and recognize a familiar target melody if the target is prespecified, thereby permitting them to search actively for it (Expt III). But familiarity or prespecification of the interleaved background melody appears not to reduce its interfering effects on same-different judgments concerning unfamiliar target melodies (Expt IV).     

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.     

Sensory-perceptual qualities of images

Four experiments demonstrated that such sensory-perceptual features of objects as weight, color, and numerosity affect imaginal performance involving images of those objects. For example, imaginary transport times of objects increased with both the hypothetical weight of the imagined object and the distance traversed. The transport functions were steeper when a map of the terrain was imagined than when it was perceived, suggesting that imaginal performance of heft did not parallel more perceptually guided performance. Corresponding to the view that images activate noncanonical information from long-term memory, mental transport times were longer for maps of familiar terrains than for those of presumably unelaborated unfamiliar terrains. Further, the effects of imaginary color discriminations depended on the familiarity of the object being imagined. Images of customarily colored familiar objects were generated faster when projected onto a surface of the same color than when projected onto a surface of another color, whereas images constructed from unfamiliar targets were recognized more accurately when the target's color differed substantially from that of the ground than when it differed by a smaller amount. The results were predicted by a model that assumed that images may incorporate ancillary characteristics in addition to canonical information.     

On the bounded rationality of gender stereotyping in fame judgments

The false‐fame effect is the phenomenon that familiar names are falsely judged famous more often than unfamiliar names. M.R. Banaji and A.G. Greenwald ( 1995 ) demonstrated a gender bias in the false‐fame effect: In line with existing gender stereotypes, the false‐fame effect was larger for male than for female names. A more general explanation for gender biasing in fame judgments is based on cognitive availability. Name gender could be used as an ecologically valid cue when making fame judgments. If the relevant universe of famous names contained more male than female names, a gender bias in fame judgments should be observed, if it contained more female names, the gender bias should be reversed. Indeed, this pattern could be demonstrated experimentally, and we argue that it is not compatible with an account that draws on gender stereotyping but with one based on cognitive availability. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Walking through a virtual environment improves perceived size within and beyond the walked space

Distances tend to be underperceived in virtual environments (VEs) by up to 50%, whereas distances tend to be perceived accurately in the real world. Previous work has shown that allowing participants to interact with the VE while receiving continual visual feedback can reduce this underperception. Judgments of virtual object size have been used to measure whether this improvement is due to the rescaling of perceived space, but there is disagreement within the literature as to whether judgments of object size benefit from interaction with feedback. This study contributes to that discussion by employing a more natural measure of object size. We also examined whether any improvement in virtual distance perception was limited to the space used for interaction (1–5 m) or extended beyond (7–11 m). The results indicated that object size judgments do benefit from interaction with the VE, and that this benefit extends to distances beyond the explored space.