바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.22 No.2
Citation Share

Perceiving Time-to-Contact under Severely Perturbed and Sparse Flow Fields

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2010, v.22 no.2, pp.197-213
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2010.22.2.005

(2010). Perceiving Time-to-Contact under Severely Perturbed and Sparse Flow Fields. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 22(2), 197-213, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2010.22.2.005
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

The present study examined human observers’ perceptual capacity to estimate time-to-contact (TTC) of an approaching object under severely perturbed or impoverished optic flow that compromised TTC information, in particular, local tau1. In Experiment 1, non-spherical objects approached the observation point while rotating either about one (horizontal or vertical) or two axes. The objects were depicted using random dots that varied in density (4, 16, 64, or 256 dots), half of which were projected to the observer. Under object rotation, the surface dots were displaced or even disappeared. These manipulations severely compromised the optical pattern specifying local tau1. In Experiment 1, performance degraded with decreasing dot density. Particularly, performance in the 4 dot density condition differed significantly from performance in the three higher density conditions. Experiment 2 examined whether these results accurately depicted the capacity of the human visual system. Objects either approached, or retreated from, the observation point; and participants were asked to judge the direction of the object’s motion. With an overall accuracy of 89%, most objects’ motion directions were identified reliably, even in the 4 dot density condition. Taken together, the present study demonstrated that the human visual system is capable of coping with adverse conditions by extracting requisite information, in particular, local tau1, that specifies the TTC of an approaching object, even from severely perturbed and impoverished optic flow. However, the present results also demonstrate that, under certain extreme conditions such as those engendered by rugby ball shaped object that rotated 90 deg over their approaches to the observation point, the visual system can fail, a finding consistent with that reported by Gray and Regan (2000).

keywords
접촉시간지각, local tau, 비원형물체, 결밀도, 성긴 광흐름, time-to-contact, local tau, non-spherical objects, texture density, optical perturbation

Reference

1.

김남균 (2009). 회전하는 비원형물체의 접촉시간 지각. 한국심리학회: 인지 및 생물, 21, 73-90.

2.

Bootsma, R. J., & Craig, C. M. (2002). Global and local contributions to the optical specification of time to contact: Observer sensitivity to composite tau. Perception, 31, 901-924.

3.

Bootsma, R. J., & van Wieringen, P. C. W. (1990). Timing an attacking forehand drive in table tennis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 21-29.

4.

Cavallo, V., & Laurent, M. (1988). Visual information and skill level in time-to-collision estimation. Perception, 17, 623-632.

5.

Davies, M. N. O,, & Green, P. R. (1990). Flow-field variables trigger landing in hawk but not in pigeons. Naturwissenschaften, 77, 142-144.

6.

DeLucia, P. R. (1991). Pictorial and motion-based information for depth perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 738-748.

7.

Gray, R., & Regan, D. (1998). Accuracy of estimating time to collision using binocular and monocular information. Vision Research, 38, 499-512.

8.

Gray, R., & Regan, D. (2000). Estimating time to collision with a rotating nonspherical object. Vision Research, 40, 49-63.

9.

Hecht, H., & Savelsbergh, G. J. P. (2004). Theories of time-to-contact judgment. In H. Hecht & G. J. P. Savelsburgh (Eds.), Time-to-contact (pp. 1-11). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

10.

Kim, N.-G., & Grocki, M. J. (2006). Multiple sources of information and time-to-contact judgments. Vision Research, 46, 1946-1958.

11.

Lee, D. N. (1976). A theory of visual control of braking based on information about time-to-collision. Perception, 5, 437-459.

12.

Lee, D. N., Davies, M. N. O., Green, P. R., & van der Weel, F. R. (1993). Visual control of velocity of approach by pigeons when landing. Journal of Experimental Biology, 180, 85-104.

13.

Lee, D. N., & Reddish, P. E. (1981). Plummeting gannets: a paradigm of ecological optics. Nature, 293, 293–294.

14.

Lee, D. N., Reddish, P. E., & Rand, D. T. (1991). Aerial docking by hummingbirds. Naturwissenschaften, 78, 526-527.

15.

McLeod, R. W., & Ross, H. E. (1983). Optic-flow and cognitive factors in time-to-collision estimates. Perception, 12, 417-423.

16.

Peper, C. E., Bootsma, R. J., Mestre, D. R., & Bakker, F. C. (1994). Catching balls: How to get the hand to the fight place at the right time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 591-612.

17.

Regan, D. (1997). Visual factors in catching and hitting. Journal of Sports Sciences, 15, 533-558.

18.

Rind, F. C. & Simmons, P. J. (1992). Orthopteran DCMD neuron: A reevaluation of responses to moving objects. I. Selective responses to approaching objects. J. Neurophysiol. 68, 1654-1666.

19.

Rosenblum, L. D. (2010). See what I am saying: The extraordinary powers of our five senses. NY: W. W. Norton & Company.

20.

Rushton, S. K., & Wann, J. P. (1999). Weighted combination of size and disparity: a computational model for timing a ball catch. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 186-190.

21.

Savelsbergh, G. J. P., Whiting, H. T. A., & Bootsma, R. J. (1991). “Grasping” tau! Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 315-33.

22.

Schiff, W., & Detwiler, M. L. (1979). Information used in judging impending collision. Perception, 8. 647-58.

23.

Simmons, P. J. & Rind, F. C. (1992). Orthopteran DCMD neuron: A reevaluation of responses to moving objects. II. Critical cues for detecting approaching objects. Journal of Neurophysiology, 68, 1667-1682.

24.

Tresilian, J. R. (1991). Empirical and theoretical issues in the perception of time to contact. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 865-876.

25.

Tresilian, J. R. (1995). Perceptual and cognitive processes in time-to-contact estimation: Analysis of prediction-motion and relative judgment task. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 231-245.

26.

Wagner, H. (1982). Flow-field variables trigger landing in flies. Nature, 297, 147-148.

27.

Wang, Y. & Frost, B. J. (1992). Time to collision is signalled by neurons in the nucleus rotundus of pigeons. Nature, 356, 236-238.

28.

Warren, W. H. (2007). Action-scaled information for the visual control of locomotion. In G. Pepping & M. A. Grealy (Eds.), Closing the gap: The scientific writings of David N. Lee (pp. 243-258). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy