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.     

Scene layout from ground contact,occlusion, and motion parallax

An important factor in determining perceived scene layout is optical contact between objects and the ground surface (“ground contact”). The relation between ground contact and occlusion was investigated in four experiments with stationary and motion parallax scenes containing a pole that occluded or was occluded by one or more cylinders. Some judgements were inconsistent with occlusion in stationary scenes, but judgements were consistent with occlusion in motion parallax scenes. When the range of object positions consistent with occlusion did not include the positions specified by ground contract or by motion parallax, the ground contact and motion parallax information still had a quantitative effect on the perceived position of the object within the range consistent with occlusion. These results demonstrate a cooperative interaction between ground contact, occlusion, and motion parallax in determining perceived layout in 3-D scenes.     

IN DEFENSE OF THE BODY: THE EFFECT OF MORTALITY SALIENCE ON FEMALE BODY OBJECTIFICATION

Previous research has illustrated the negative psychological consequences of female body objectification. The present study explores how female body objectification may serve as a defense against unconscious existential fears. Drawing from terror management theory, an experiment was designed to test the potential functionality of female body objectification. Men and women were primed to think about either their own mortality or an aversive control topic, and levels of body objectification were then assessed for both self- and other (women)-objectification. Findings supported the hypothesis that priming mortality would increase both self- and other-objectification among women, and self-objectification among those who derive self-esteem from their body. Implications for this research are discussed.     

Abstract versus Causal Explanations?

In the recent literature on causal and non-causal scientific explanations, there is an intuitive assumption (which we call the ‘abstractness assumption’) according to which an explanation is non-causal by virtue of being abstract. In this context, to be ‘abstract’ means that the explanans in question leaves out many or almost all causal microphysical details of the target system. After motivating this assumption, we argue that the abstractness assumption, in placing the abstract and the causal character of an explanation in tension, is misguided in ways that are independent of which view of causation or causal explanation one takes to be most accurate. On major accounts of causation, as well as on major accounts of causal explanation, the abstractness of an explanation is not sufficient for it being non-causal. That is, explanations are not non-causal by dint of being abstract.     

Traumatic stress, perceived global stress, and life events: prospectively predicting quality of life in breast cancer patients.

The authors investigated the relationship between stress at initial cancer diagnosis and treatment and subsequent quality of life (QoL). Women (n = 112) randomized to the assessment-only arm of a clinical trial were initially assessed after breast cancer diagnosis and surgery and then reassessed at 4 months (during adjuvant treatment) and 12 months (postadjuvant treatment). There were 3 types of stress measured: number of stressful life events (K. A. Matthews et al., 1997), cancer-related traumatic stress symptoms (M. J. Horowitz, N. Wilner, & W. Alvarez, 1979), and perceived global stress (S. Cohen, T. Kamarck, & R. Mermelstein, 1983). Using hierarchical multiple regressions, the authors found that stress predicted both psychological and physical QoL (J. E. Ware, K. K. Snow, & M. Kosinski, 2000) at the follow-ups (all ps < .03). These findings substantiate the relationship between initial stress and later QoL and underscore the need for timely psychological intervention.     

Diffusion of e-commerce in Denmark: An analysis of institutional intervention

This article analyzes the way a series of recent policy statements have been used to promote and shape the take-up of e-commerce in Denmark. Issuing periodic policy statements, with a combination of direct and indirect modes of intervention, is one of the roads governments are taking to influence the evolutions of ICT. The policy statements present the goals, launch initiatives, and assess achievements. Complementing a co-or self-regulation strategy, the policy statement approach has become particularly important in areas where governments seek to influence the take-up of a technology without appearing to tip the scales. She did her Ph.D. at the Center for Electronic Commerce, at Department of Informatics, Copenhagen Business School. Helle Zinner Henriksen has a degree in Law (University of Copenhagen, 1995). Her research interests include: Adoption and diffusion of Interorganizational Information Systems, e-government, and institutional regulation of electronic commerce and e-government. Kim Viborg Andersen is a researcher in organizational and policy aspects of IT. Andersen’s research encompasses various applications: economic models, EIS/BIS, health data network, EDI, e-commerce, and mobile applications primarily within the public sector domain. He is co-founder of the AIS SIG on e-government, vice-chair of the IFIP WG 8.4 on interdisciplinary e-business and on various editorial boards for journals. He is head of the Center for Research on Information Technology in Policy Settings (CIPS) at the Copenhagen Business School.     

Nanoethics—A Collaboration Across Disciplines

The field of nanoscience and nanotechnology is expanding rapidly, promising great benefits for society in the form of better medicine, more efficient energy production, new types of materials, etc. Naturally, in order for the science and technology to live up to these promises, it is important to continue scientific research and development, but equally important is the ethical dimension. Giving attention to the social, ethical and legal aspects of the field, among others, will help in developing a fully responsible—and thereby capable—science and technology. Nanoethics has emerged as a field concerned with such ethical issues related to nanoscience and nanotechnology. Even though this field is relatively new, a significant amount of literature has already been published. This paper focuses on three of the major issues which are discussed in the literature of nanoethics, and also points to a certain bias in this literature. Each quite different in nature, these issues are: (1) The naming and (2) the timing of and approach to the field, as well as (3) the issue of safety. As will be seen, these issues are almost exclusively discussed by ethicists, (throughout the article, the term’ethicist’ is used in a broad definition covering philosophers, social and political scientists as well as philosophers of science) thus having no direct influence on the work being carried out by scientists. One can argue, therefore, that this bias creates a distortion of the ethical debate, making it insufficient and misleading. Ultimately, this bias is caused by the lack of communication and collaboration between ethicists on the one hand, and nanoscientists on the other. Thus, an argument is made for the different disciplines to begin collaborating, so as to more effectively and responsibly develop the field of nanoscience.