pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Visual field dependence as a navigational strategy - PubMed

Visual field dependence as a navigational strategy

Chéla R Willey et al. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2014 May.

Abstract

Visual perception is an important component of environmental navigation. Previous research has revealed large individual differences in navigational strategies (i.e., the body's kinesthetic and embodied approach to movement) and the perception of environmental surfaces (via distance estimations), but little research has investigated the potential relationship between these sources of individual variation. An important navigational strategy is the interaction between reliance on visual cues and vestibular or proprioceptive cues. We investigated the role of this navigational strategy in the perception of environmental surfaces. The results supported three embodied evolutionary predictions: Individuals who were most reliant on visual context (1) overestimated vertical surfaces significantly more, and (2) feared falling significantly more, than did those who were least reliant on visual context; and (3) all individuals had roughly accurate horizontal distance estimates, regardless of their navigational strategy. These are among the first data to suggest that individual differences in perception are closely related to the individual differences in navigation that derive from navigational risks. Variable navigational strategies may reflect variable capacities to perceive and navigate the environment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Distance estimation procedure (not to scale). The dotted icon represents the participant, a represents the estimated vertical distance, and b represents the estimated horizontal distance (both equal to 5.64 m). The arrow indicates the direction in which the research assistant walked for all estimates

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

(Top) Third-person view of the rod-and-frame (RFT) apparatus. The research assistant (on the left) rotated the rod per the participant's verbal instructions until the participant estimated the rod to be vertical with respect to gravity. The participant (on the right) sat on a backless chair with a curtain over his or her head and viewed a tilted rod that appeared at the end of a tilted frame. (Bottom) Participant view from inside the RFT apparatus. In this particular trial, the rod is initially placed at –18 deg and the frame set is at +18 deg away from vertical. Participants also completed the following trials: rod +18 deg and frame +18 deg, rod – 18 deg and frame –18 deg, and rod +18 deg and frame –18 deg, for a total of four trials

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Noncopyrighted example of a typical embedded figures item. Participants searched for and traced a specified simple shape (right panel) within a more complex shape (left panel)

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

(Top left) Correlation between vertical distance estimates and visual reliance, based on the rod-and-frame test. (Bottom left) Correlation between vertical distance estimates and visual reliance, based on the Embedded Figures Test. The dashed line indicates the actual distance (5.64 m) on both graphs. (Top right) Correlation between horizontal distance estimates and visual reliance, based on the rod-and-frame test. (Bottom right) Correlation between horizontal distance estimates and visual reliance, based on the Embedded Figures Test. The dashed line indicates the actual distance (5.64 m) on both graphs

Fig. 5
Fig. 5

(Top) Relationship between mean estimates of a vertical surface and visual reliance across tasks. (Bottom) Relationship between mean estimates of a horizontal surface and visual reliance across tasks. The dashed lines indicate the actual distance (5.64 m), gray bars indicate visually dependent individuals, and white bars indicate visually independent individuals. Error bars represent 95 % confidence intervals about the means. *p < .05

Fig. 6
Fig. 6

(Top) Correlation between height anxiety scores and visual reliance, based on the rod-and-frame test. (Bottom) Correlation between height anxiety scores and visual reliance, based on the Embedded Figures Test

Fig. 7
Fig. 7

Relationship between average scores on the height anxiety questionnaire and visual reliance across tasks. Gray bars indicate visually dependent individuals, and white bars indicate visually independent individuals. Error bars represent 95 % confidence intervals about the means

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Balcetis E, Dunning D. Wishful seeing: More desired objects are seen as closer. Psychological Science. 2010;21:147–152. doi:10.1177/0956797609356283. - PubMed
    1. Bridgeman B, Hoover M. Processing spatial layout by perception and sensorimotor interaction. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2008;61:851–859. doi:10.1080/17470210701623712. - PubMed
    1. Chapanis A, Mankin DA. The vertical–horizontal illusion in a visually-rich environment. Perception & Psychophysics. 1967;2:249–255. doi:10.3758/BF03212474.
    1. Coelho CM, Wallis G. Deconstructing acrophobia: Physiological and psychological precursors to developing a fear of heights. Depression and Anxiety. 2010;27:864–870. doi:10.1002/da.20698. - PubMed
    1. Cohen DC. Comparison of self-report and overt-behavioral procedures for assessing acrophobia. Behavior Therapy. 1977;8:17–23. doi:10.1016/S0005-7894(77)80116-0.

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources