Manual matching of perceived surface orientation is affected by arm posture: evidence of calibration between proprioception and visual experience in near space
TL;DR: Two claims are supported: (1) manual orientation matching to visual surfaces is based on manual proprioception and (2) calibration between visual and proprioceptive experiences guarantees relatively accurate manual matching for surfaces within reach, despite systematic visual biases in perceived surface orientation.
Abstract: Proprioception of hand orientation (orientation production using the hand) is compared with manual matching of visual orientation (visual surface matching using the hand) in two experiments. In experiment 1, using self-selected arm postures, the proportions of wrist and elbow flexion spontaneously used to orient the pitch of the hand (20 and 80%, respectively) are relatively similar across both manual matching tasks and manual orientation production tasks for most participants. Proprioceptive error closely matched perceptual biases previously reported for visual orientation perception, suggesting calibration of proprioception to visual biases. A minority of participants, who attempted to use primarily wrist flexion while holding the forearm horizontal, performed poorly at the manual matching task, consistent with proprioceptive error caused by biomechanical constraints of their self-selected posture. In experiment 2, postural choices were constrained to primarily wrist or elbow flexion without imposing biomechanical constraints (using a raised forearm). Identical relative offsets were found between the two constraint groups in manual matching and manual orientation production. The results support two claims: (1) manual orientation matching to visual surfaces is based on manual proprioception and (2) calibration between visual and proprioceptive experiences guarantees relatively accurate manual matching for surfaces within reach, despite systematic visual biases in perceived surface orientation.
Citations
More filters
27 Jan 2012
TL;DR: The two main purposes of this chapter are to review past evidence for a systematic spatial bias in the perception of surface orientation (geographical slant), and to report two new experiments documenting this biases in the manual haptic system.
Abstract: The two main purposes of this chapter are to review past evidence for a systematic spatial bias in the perception of surface orientation (geographical slant), and to report two new experiments documenting this bias in the manual haptic system. Orientation is a fundamental perceptual property of surfaces that is relevant both for planning and implementing actions. Geographical slant refers to the orientation (inclination or pitch along its main axis) of a surface relative to the gravitationally-defined horizontal. It has long been known that hills appear visually steeper than they are (e.g., Ross, 1974). Only recently has it been documented that (1) there is also bias in the haptic perception of surface orientation (Hajnal et al., 2011), and that (2) similar visual and haptic biases even exist for small surfaces within reach (Durgin, Li & Hajnal, 2010).
18 citations
TL;DR: Although all of the perceptual measures used showed similar effects, visual matching was the only measure that had good intrasubject reliability and was recommended that future research on this action-specific effect could use any measure unless the research is geared towards individual differences, in which case, only the visual matching measure of perceived distance should be used.
Abstract: Distances on hills are judged as farther than when the same distance is presented on the flat ground. The hypothesized reason for this difference is because perception is influenced by the increased effort required to walk up a hill than to walk the same distance on flat ground. Alternatively, distances presented up a hill might be judged as farther for other, nonperceptual reasons such as bias from demand characteristics. To test whether distances on hills are perceived as farther or are merely judged as farther, we used a variety of measures, including visual matching and blindwalking tasks, and found similar effects across all measures. This convergence is consistent with a perceptual explanation. Second, we mined our data with the goal of making recommendations for future research on this paradigm. Although all of the perceptual measures used showed similar effects, visual matching was the only measure that had good intrasubject reliability. We recommend that future research on this action-specific effect could use any measure unless the research is geared towards individual differences, in which case, only the visual matching measure of perceived distance should be used.
16 citations
Cites background from "Manual matching of perceived surfac..."
...One is that the haptic measure may be limited by biomechanics (cf. Li & Durgin, 2012) that prevented a genuine increase in perceived slant to be measured....
[...]
TL;DR: An experiment conducted on a small college campus tested whether the remembered slants of familiar paths were precisely represented, suggesting a common underlying representation was consulted in all cases.
Abstract: Whereas maps typically depict the two-dimensional layout of an environment, the vertical dimension is generally encountered only directly The possible importance of inclines as an orienting landmark in the environment (Nardi & Bingman, 2009), as well as the energetic significance of hills (Kammann, 1967; Proffitt, Bhalla, Gossweiler & Midgett, 1995) suggests that detailed memory of this aspect of the environment might be quite useful for navigation and route planning Geographical slant refers to surface slant relative to horizontal (Sedgwick, 1986) Previous studies of memory for geographical slant have focused primarily on newly-observed outdoor surfaces (Creem & Proffit, 1998) or on small indoor surfaces (Haun, Allen & Wedell, 2005), and each has reported biases in memory using both verbal and manual estimates Creem and Proffitt reported evidence of additional exaggeration in memory, whereas Haun et al reported a categorical bias toward 45° for both types of measure What has not been investigated experimentally is whether extremely familiar locomotor surfaces (eg, paths frequently taken in daily life) are subject to similar memory distortions
We sought to assess the precision of the information in memory about the geographical slant of a familiar environment (a small college campus) Our principal question is not one of representational accuracy It is well documented that geographical slant is overestimated (Kammann, 1967; Li & Durgin, 2010; Proffitt, Bhalla, Gossweiller & Midgett, 1995; Ross, 1974) Rather, our question is of representational precision The distinction between accuracy and precision is fundamental to measurement Precision is usually measured in terms of variability, or uncertainty, whereas accuracy is measured in terms of signed error or bias If one's perception of a hill is consistent, but highly biased, accuracy could be poor even while precision is good In fact, precise coding is more crucial than accurate coding for controlling action because, so long as actions and perceptions are coded in the same scale, actions themselves can be accurate (ie, effective) without the representations that guide them being veridical This allows action control to be able to adapt to distorted visual input, such as adaptation to wedge prisms that offset the perceived location of a target to the left When wearing such prisms, skilled reaching to grasp an object quickly adapts so that although the object still appears to be displaced (eg, to the left of one's midline) ballistic reaching becomes successful because one's proprioception of hand position comes to be shifted as well (Harris, 1980) So long as there is opportunity for calibration of action to visual experience, the success of action control depends on the precision rather than the accuracy of the perception A recent theoretical account of the exaggeration of geographical slant argues that angular perceptual variables are systematically biased (coded on an expanded scale) in order to retain greater coding precision (Durgin & Li, 2011)
For similar reasons, memory representations of surface layout ought to be most informative if they are scaled similarly to perception Moreover, the precision of such memory representations is of particular interest One would expect that estimates from newly-formed memories would be more variable (less precise) than those from perception and thus more open to categorical bias That is, judgmental biases have greater impact on estimates when estimate uncertainty is high (precision is low) But memory variability might decline to something quite close to the limits available in perception for familiar hills Indeed, given that a familiar slope might have been observed from many different perspectives, it is possible that a memory representation of a familiar surface could be even richer than that obtained by perceptual experience from a single vantage point On a small campus with a single dining hall, students may become experts not only at 2D route knowledge, but also at knowing the apparent 3D shape of the terrain they are frequently traversing
Haun et al (2005) proposed that memory errors in slant judgments might be due to categorical distortions and biases For example, memory for position is biased toward categorical locations (eg, Engbretson & Huttenlocher, 1996; Huttenlocher, Hedges & Duncan, 1991) and memory for angles (Fisher, 1968), graphs and figures also show systematic distortion (Tversky & Schiano, 1989) so that errors in slant memory may be quite general But one might nonetheless expect that highly familiar surfaces would be remembered as they actually appear to us
There have been many investigations of spatial memory biases for the 2D layout of real environments and maps (eg, Bahrick, 1979; Byrne, 1979; Tversky, 1981) However, most of these studies address novel layouts or long periods of storage The one study conducted by Creem and Proffitt (1998) for familiar hills (Experiment 3) was non-experimental in that all participants were tested only in the memory condition and were then compared to perceptual estimates previously collected by Proffitt et al (1995) under different circumstances We therefore sought to conduct a full experimental comparison of memory and perception for familiar slants
We used a small liberal arts college campus as the stimulus for our study Swarthmore College is situated in a variably inclined environment that provides a shared locomotor experience for its students There is a single dining hall, for example, that is commonly exited by ascending a somewhat steep extended path to the main academic area of the campus The campus is relatively small, so students are familiar with most of its paths But, how familiar are they with their slopes? That is, how precise are their memory representations and how similar are they to their perceptual experience?
We compared slant estimates obtained when students directly observed each of several paths with estimates obtained when other students recalled the same paths from memory To anticipate the results, students differentiated the various slopes of the tested paths equally well both in perception and in memory and there were no salient differences between estimates made from memory and from perception This suggests that incidental memory representations of the vertical dimension of a familiar locomotor environment can be quite rich
Perception and memory for familiar paths
The front of the campus of Swarthmore College features an extended broad hillside, of variable slope, at the center of which extends a tree-lined path (Magill Walk) leading up to the central college building (Parrish Hall) from the train station and town center We selected for study five well-travelled campus paths in this region of campus ranging from nearly flat (05°) to the steepest extended section of path (86°) in this part of campus Images of the steeper paths, and the locations of all the tested paths are illustrated in Figure 1
Figure 1
The locations of the five slanted paths used in the study on a campus map “Routes” refers to the 5 different orders used in both the perception condition and in the memory condition Below, the three steeper paths are shown in frontal
10 citations
Additional excerpts
...… Durgin (2011) have proposed that free-‐hand manual estimates, which have been shown to be excellently calibrated for surfaces within reach (Durgin et al., 2010a, 2010b, Li & Durgin, 2011, 2012), may be understood as representing the perceptual …...
[...]
... The manual measure required attempting to hold up one’s hand (unseen behind a vertical barrier) parallel to the surface orientation of the path (Durgin, Hajnal, Li, Tonge & Stigliani, 2010; Durgin, Li & Hajnal, 2010; Li & Durgin, 2011, 2012)....
[...]
... Humans have precise knowledge of familiar geographical slants Anthony Stigliani Swarthmore College and Stanford University Zhi Li and Frank H. Durgin Swarthmore College Author Note Anthony Stigliani, Department of Psychology, Swarthmore College and Department of Psychology, Stanford University; Zhi Li and Frank H. Durgin, Department of Psychology, Swarthmore College....
[...]
... Durgin, F. H., Hajnal, A., Li, Z., Tonge, N., & Stigliani, A. (2010a)....
[...]
...DOI: 10.1037/a0033865 https://works.swarthmore.edu/fac-psychology/143 Stigliani, A., Li, Z., & Durgin, F. H. (2013)....
[...]
TL;DR: Strong manual anchoring effects were obtained for a large range of near-surface slants, including 45°, and correlations between participants’ manual and verbal estimates support the conclusion that both measures are based on the same visual representation.
Abstract: People verbally overestimate hill slant by ~15°–25°, whereas manual estimates (e.g., palm board measures) are thought to be more accurate. The relative accuracy of palm boards has contributed to the widely cited theoretical claim that they tap into an accurate, but unconscious, motor representation of locomotor space. Recently, it was shown that a bias that stems from anchoring the hand at horizontal prior to the estimate can quantitatively account for the difference between manual and verbal estimates of hill slant. The present work extends this observation to manual estimates of near-surface slant, to test whether the bias derives from manual or visual uncertainty. As with far surfaces, strong manual anchoring effects were obtained for a large range of near-surface slants, including 45°. Moreover, correlations between participants’ manual and verbal estimates further support the conclusion that both measures are based on the same visual representation.
10 citations
Cites background from "Manual matching of perceived surfac..."
...For example, participants asked to set their (unseen) hand to “45°” will only set it to about 34°, and this corresponds to the visual slant that they describe as appearing to be 45° (Li & Durgin, 2012)....
[...]
...…the verbal measures (otherwise, the two measures would likely not be correlated), but it is consistent with the theory that manual actions must tend to be calibrated so that they are effective in acting on the world, even when perceptual experience is distorted (Li & Durgin, 2012; Li et al., 2013)....
[...]
01 Jan 1999
TL;DR: It is established that a description of the results in terms of a horizontal gradient in the deviations is valid over a large part of haptic space, over large distances, and in both unimanual and bimanual conditions.
Abstract: There is increasing evidence that haptic space is not veridical.
One of the first to report on this phenomenon was Blumenfeld (1937).
Recently, Kappers and Koenderink (1998) showed that what subjects
haptically perceive as parallel often deviates largely from what is actually
physically parallel. These deviations are not random but show distinctive
patterns.
This study is an extension of their experiment: (1) The possible
positions of the stimuli cover a much larger area, so that the distances
between the stimuli can also be much larger. (2) Experiments are done
both unimanually (right and left hand) and bimanually.
9 citations
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1979TL;DR: The relationship between Stimulation and Stimulus Information for visual perception is discussed in detail in this article, where the authors also present experimental evidence for direct perception of motion in the world and movement of the self.
Abstract: Contents: Preface. Introduction. Part I: The Environment To Be Perceived.The Animal And The Environment. Medium, Substances, Surfaces. The Meaningful Environment. Part II: The Information For Visual Perception.The Relationship Between Stimulation And Stimulus Information. The Ambient Optic Array. Events And The Information For Perceiving Events. The Optical Information For Self-Perception. The Theory Of Affordances. Part III: Visual Perception.Experimental Evidence For Direct Perception: Persisting Layout. Experiments On The Perception Of Motion In The World And Movement Of The Self. The Discovery Of The Occluding Edge And Its Implications For Perception. Looking With The Head And Eyes. Locomotion And Manipulation. The Theory Of Information Pickup And Its Consequences. Part IV: Depiction.Pictures And Visual Awareness. Motion Pictures And Visual Awareness. Conclusion. Appendixes: The Principal Terms Used in Ecological Optics. The Concept of Invariants in Ecological Optics.
21,493 citations
TL;DR: It is proposed that the ventral stream of projections from the striate cortex to the inferotemporal cortex plays the major role in the perceptual identification of objects, while the dorsal stream projecting from the stripping to the posterior parietal region mediates the required sensorimotor transformations for visually guided actions directed at such objects.
5,878 citations
"Manual matching of perceived surfac..." refers background in this paper
...One possibility is that action is separated from conscious perception so that it is immune to visual distortion (Goodale and Milner 1992; Haffenden and Goodale 1998; Milner and Goodale 1995)....
[...]
...One possibility is that action is separated from conscious perception, so that it is immune to visual distortion (Goodale and Milner 1992; HaVenden and Goodale 1998; Milner and Goodale 1995)....
[...]
10 Sep 1989
5,275 citations
"Manual matching of perceived surfac..." refers background in this paper
...Light interacting with these surfaces provides optical information (e.g., the ambient optical array; Gibson 1979) to the visual system, which helps observers to perceive the threedimensional structure of the environment....
[...]
...Light interacting with these surfaces provides optical information (e.g. the ambient optical array; Gibson 1979) to the visual system, which helps observers to perceive the three dimensional structure of the environment....
[...]
Book•
01 Jan 1995TL;DR: This chapter discusses vision from a biological point of view, attention, consciousness, and the coordination of behaviour in primate visual cortex, and discusses dissociations between perception and action in normal subjects.
Abstract: Prologue 1. Introduction: vision from a biological point of view 2. Visual processing in the primate visual cortex 3. 'Cortical blindness' 4. Disorders of spatial perception and the visual control of action 5. Disorders of visual recognition 6. Dissociations between perception and action in normal subjects 7. Attention, consciousness, and the coordination of behaviour 8. Epilogue: twelve years on
4,115 citations
"Manual matching of perceived surfac..." refers background in this paper
...One possibility is that action is separated from conscious perception so that it is immune to visual distortion (Goodale and Milner 1992; Haffenden and Goodale 1998; Milner and Goodale 1995)....
[...]
...One possibility is that action is separated from conscious perception, so that it is immune to visual distortion (Goodale and Milner 1992; HaVenden and Goodale 1998; Milner and Goodale 1995)....
[...]
Book•
01 Jan 1986
TL;DR: This handbook covers theory and methods; basic visual processes; auditory, kinesthetic, cutaneous, and vestibular senses; and space and motion perception; and human performance.
Abstract: Written by well-known specialists, here is a comprehensive handbook on human perception and performance. Volume one covers theory and methods; basic visual processes; auditory, kinesthetic, cutaneous, and vestibular senses; and space and motion perception. Volume two treats information processing, perceptual organization and cognition, and human performance. Organized to facilitate reference usefulness, these volumes provide substantial cross-referencing and extensive use of illustrations. In addition, a substantial amount of tutorial material is provided, with several hundred pages devoted to the elucidation of the conceptual and methodological underpinnings of the more substantive chapters. Figure legends are extremely detailed to enhance their reference usefulness without having to search accompanying text for relevant coverage.
3,166 citations