The University of St Andrews

Research@StAndrews:FullText >
University of St Andrews Research >
University of St Andrews Research >
University of St Andrews Research >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
This item has been viewed 9 times in the last year. View Statistics

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
depth_bias_qjep_inpress.pdf488.99 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: Perception of relative depth interval : Systematic biases in perceived depth
Authors: Harris, Julie
Chopin, Adrien
Zeiner, Katharina Maria
Hibbard, Paul Barry
Keywords: Binocular disparity
Depth interval
Metric depth
Vertical horopter
BF Psychology
Issue Date: 2012
Citation: Harris , J , Chopin , A , Zeiner , K M & Hibbard , P B 2012 , ' Perception of relative depth interval : Systematic biases in perceived depth ' The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , vol 65 , no. 1 , pp. 73-91 . , 10.1080/17470218.2011.589520
Abstract: Given an estimate of the binocular disparity between a pair of points and an estimate of the viewing distance, or knowledge of eye position, it should be possible to obtain an estimate of their depth separation. Here we show that, when points are arranged in different vertical geometric configurations across two intervals, many observers find this task difficult. Those who can do the task tend to perceive the depth interval in one configuration as very different from depth in the other configuration. We explore two plausible explanations for this effect. The first is the tilt of the empirical vertical horopter: Points perceived along an apparently vertical line correspond to a physical line of points tilted backwards in space. Second, the eyes can rotate in response to a particular stimulus. Without compensation for this rotation, biases in depth perception would result. We measured cyclovergence indirectly, using a standard psychophysical task, while observers viewed our depth configuration. Biases predicted from error due either to cyclovergence or to the tilted vertical horopter were not consistent with the depth configuration results. Our data suggest that, even for the simplest scenes, we do not have ready access to metric depth from binocular disparity.
Version: Preprint
Status: Peer reviewed
ISSN: 1747-0218
Type: Journal article
Rights: This is a preprint of an article whose final and definitive form has been published in The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology © 2012, copyright Taylor & Francis and The Experimental Psychology Society. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology is available online at
Appears in Collections:University of St Andrews Research
Psychology & Neuroscience Research
Institute of Behavioural and Neural Sciences Research

This item is protected by original copyright

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.


DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2012  Duraspace - Feedback
For help contact: | Copyright for this page belongs to St Andrews University Library | Terms and Conditions (Cookies)