An account of the systematic error in judging what is reachable.

An account of the postural determinants of perceived reachability is proposed to explain systematic overestimations of the distance at which an object is perceived to be reachable. In this account, these errors are due to a mapping of the limits of prehensile space onto a person's perceived region of maximum stretchability, in the context of a whole-body engagement. In support of this account, 6 experiments on the judged reachability of both static and dynamic objects are reported. We tentatively conclude that the mental imagery of action is grounded and calibrated in reference to multiple skeletal degrees of behavioral freedom. Accordingly, this calibration is a source of systematic error in reachability judgments. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Using eye height in different postures to scale the heights of objects.

Four experiments examined eye height (EH) scaling of object height across different postures. In Experiment 1, participants viewed rectangular targets while they were standing, seated, and prone. Standing and seated judgments were similar, possibly due to EH scaling. Prone judgments were significantly lower, a result not attributable to the unfamiliarity of that posture (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, shifts of seated EH produced height overestimations equivalent to those of standing viewers. Experiment 4 examined the visual salience of size information in the seated and prone judgments by holding EH constant and manipulating another source: linear perspective. Participants viewed targets placed on true- and false-perspective (FP) gradients. The FP gradient affected prone judgments but not seated judgments, which presumably relied on EH. It appears that the human visual system weights size information differentially depending on its utility. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Updating displays after imagined object and viewer rotations.

Six experiments compared spatial updating of an array after imagined rotations of the array versus viewer. Participants responded faster and made fewer errors in viewer tasks than in array tasks while positioned outside (Experiment 1) or inside (Experiment 2) the array. An apparent array advantage for updating objects rather than locations was attributable to participants imagining translations of single objects rather than rotations of the array (Experiment 3). Superior viewer performance persisted when the array was reduced to 1 object (Experiment 4); however, an object with a familiar configuration improved object performance somewhat (Experiment 5). Object performance reached near-viewer levels when rotations included haptic information for the turning object. The researchers discuss these findings in terms of the relative differences in which the human cognitive system transforms the spatial reference frames corresponding to each imagined rotation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Thinking outside the body: An advantage for spatial updating during imagined versus physical self-rotation.

Three studies examined effects of different response measures on spatial updating during self-rotation. In Experiment 1, participants located objects in an array with a pointer after physical self-rotation, imagined self-rotation, and a rotation condition in which they ignored superfluous sensorimotor signals. In line with previous research, updating performance was found to be superior in the physical self-rotation condition compared with the other 2. In Experiment 2, participants performed in identical rotation movement conditions but located objects by verbal labeling rather than pointing. Within the verbal modality, an advantage for updating during imagined self-rotation was found. In Experiment 3, participants performed physical and imagined self-rotations only and used a pointing response offset from their physical reference frames. Performance was again superior during imagined self-rotations. The results suggest that it is not language processing per se that improves updating performance but rather a general reduction of the conflict between physical and projected egocentric reference frames. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Eye height scaling of absolute size in immersive and nonimmersive displays.

Eye-height (EH) scaling of absolute height was investigated in three experiments. In Experiment 1, standing observers viewed cubes in an immersive virtual environment. Observers' center of projection was placed at actual EH and at 0.7 times actual EH. Observers' size judgments revealed that the EH manipulation was 76.8% effective. In Experiment 2, seated observers viewed the same cubes on an interactive desktop display; however, no effect of EH was found in response to the simulated EH manipulation. Experiment 3 tested standing observers in the immersive environment with the field of view reduced to match that of the desktop. Comparable to Experiment 1, the effect of EH was 77%. These results suggest that EH scaling is not generally used when people view an interactive desktop display because the altitude of the center of projection is indeterminate. EH scaling is spontaneously evoked, however, in immersive environments. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)