The Effect of Perspective Geometry on Judged Direction in Spatial Information Instruments

Abstract

As part of a study of spatial information transfer, eight subjects judged the directions of displayed targets relative to a fixed reference position in the center of each of 640 perspective images. The stimulus images subtended 18 deg of the observer's visual field, while the images were constructed with geometric fields of view ranging from 30 to 120 deg. Target elevation is consistently overestimated, especially in “telephoto” images. Azimuth error varies sinusoidally with the azimuth direction of the target, alternating between clockwise and counterclockwise errors from one direction quadrant to the next. The direction of this azimuth error gradually reverses in each quadrant as the perspective is varied between “telephoto” and “wide angle” views, so that clockwise azimuth error becomes counterclockwise error, and vice versa. The amplitude of the sinusoidal azimuth error is least in the images with a 60-deg field of view. We propose a geometrical model of an interpretive behavior associated with viewing perspective displays in which the sinusoidal pattern of azimuth errors is induced by the difference between the 3D stimulus and its 2D projection, and by the consequences of the geometric differences between the station point and the observer's actual eye position.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ellis, S. R. , McGreevy, M. W. , and Hitchcock, R. J. (1984). Influence of a perspective cockpit traffic display format on pilot avoidance maneuvers. In Proceedings of the AGARD Aerospace Medical Panel Symposium on Human Factors Considerations in High Performance Aircraft. (pp. 16–1 to 16-9). Neuilly sur Seine, France: AGARD.

Farber, J. , and Rosinski, R. R. (1978). Geometric transformations of pictured space. Perception, 7, 269–282.

Foley, J. D. , and Van Dam, A. (1982). Fundamentals of interactive computer graphics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Getty, D. J. (Ed.). (1982). 3-D Displays: Perceptual research and applications to military systems. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.

Jauer, R. A. , and Quinn, T. J. (1982, February). Pictorial formats, Vol 1: Format development (Tech. Report AFWAL-TR-81-3156). Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH: Flight Dynamics Laboratory.

Jones, L. F. , Schrader, H. J. , and Marshall, J. N. (1950). Pictorial display in aircraft navigation and landing. In Proceedings of the I.R.E. (pp. 391–400). New York: Institute of Radio Engineers.

McGreevy, M. W. (1983a), A perspective display of air traffic for the cockpit. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference on Manual Control (pp. 514–521). (Tech, Report AFWAL-TR-83-3021). Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH: Flight Dynamics Laboratory.

McGreevy, M. W. (1983b). A perspective display of air traffic for the cockpit, Unpublished M. S. Report, University of California, Berkeley.

McGreevy, M. W. , and Ellis, S. R. (1984). Direction judgment errors in perspective displays. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference on Manual Control (pp. 531–549; NASA Conference Publication 2341). Moffett Field, CA: NASA Ames Research Center.

10.

McGreevy, M. W. , and Ellis, S. R. , (in press). Format and basic geometry of a perspective display of air traffic for the cockpit (Tech. Memorandum 86680). Moffett Field, CA: NASA Ames Research Center, Aerospace Human Factors Research Division.

11.

Newman, W. M. , and Sproull, R. F. (1979). Principles of interactive computer graphics (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

12.

Roscoe, S. N. , Corl, L. , and Jensen, R. S. (1981). Flight display dynamics revisited. Human Factors, 23, 341–353.

13.

Smith, J, D. , Ellis, S. R. , and Lee, E. C. (1984). Perceived threat and avoidance maneuvers in response to cockpit traffic displays. Human Factors, 26, 33–48.

14.

Warner, D. A. (1979, June). Flight path displays (Tech. Report AFFDL-TR-79–3075). Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH: Flight Dynamics Laboratory.