Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Humans have a unique ability to perceive shape in different ways. Although we naturally estimate objective (physical) shape in our daily interactions with the world, we are also capable of estimating projective (retinal) shape, especially when attempting to accurately draw objects and scenes. In four experiments, we demonstrated robust effects of 3D context on shape perception. Using a binocular stereo paradigm, we presented rectangular surfaces of varying widths alone or embedded in a polyhedron. We investigated how context, judgment type, and angle affected width estimates. We found that the presence of even a small amount of 3D context aids objective judgments but hinders projective judgments, whereas a lack of context had the opposite effect. Context facilitated objective shape assessments by improving estimates of surface orientation. These results demonstrate that the typical presence of 3D context aids shape perception (shape constancy) while simultaneously making the projective judgments necessary for realistic drawing more difficult.

Keywords

shape constancy shape perception three-dimensional context stereopsis texture contour objective projective open data open materials

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Beck

Gibson

J. J.

(1955). The relation of apparent shape to apparent slant in the perception of objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50, 125–133.

Biederman

Mezzanotte

R. J.

Rabinowitz

J. C.

(1982). Scene perception: Detecting and judging objects undergoing relational violations. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 143–177.

Bies

Kikumoto

Lazarides

Sereno

(2017). Shape constancy in anaglyphs: Effects of angle, context and instruction. Journal of Vision, 17(10), Article 318. doi:10.1167/17.10.318

Brainard

D. H.

(1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436. doi:10.1163/156856897X00357

Chamberlain

McManus

I. C.

Riley

Rankin

Brunswick

(2013). Local processing enhancements associated with superior observational drawing are due to enhanced perceptual functioning, not weak central coherence. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 1448–1466. doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.750678

Cohen

D. J.

Jones

H. E.

(2008). How shape constancy relates to drawing accuracy. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2, 8–19. doi:10.1037/1931-3896.2.1.8

Davenport

J. L.

Potter

M. C.

(2004). Scene consistency in object and background perception. Psychological Science, 15, 559–564.

Drake

J. E.

Winner

(2011). Realistic drawing talent in typical adults is associated with the same kind of local processing bias found in individuals with ASD. Journal of Autism Development Disorder, 41, 1192–1201. doi:10.1007/s10803-010-1143-3

Epstein

(1973). The process of “taking-into-account” in visual perception. Perception, 2, 267–285.

10.

Epstein

Park

J. N.

(1963). Shape constancy: Functional relationships and theoretical formulations. Psychological Bulletin, 60, 265–288.

11.

Faul

Erdfelder

Lang

A.-G.

Buchner

(2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.

12.

Garmon

E. J.

Liaw

N. A.

Bies

A. J.

Robles

K. E.

Sereno

M. E.

(2019). Contextual influences on shape perception. Journal of Vision, 19(10), Article 197a. doi:10.1167/19.10.197a

13.

Holway

A. H.

Boring

E. G.

(1941). Determinants of apparent visual size with distance variant. American Journal of Psychology, 54, 21–37.

14.

Howard

I. P.

(Ed.) (2012). Perceiving in depth: Vol. 3. Other mechanisms of depth perception. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199764167.001.0001

15.

Jacobson

Gilchrist

(1988). The ratio principle holds over a million-to-one range of illumination. Perception & Psychophysics, 43, 1–6.

16.

Koffka

(1935). Principles of gestalt psychology. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace, & World.

17.

Land

E. H.

McCann

J. J.

(1971). Lightness and retinex theory. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 61, 1–11.

18.

Lappin

J. S.

Preble

L. D.

(1975). A demonstration of shape constancy. Perception & Psychophysics, 17, 439–444.

19.

Lichte

W. H.

Borresen

C. R

. (1967). Influence of instructions on degree of shape constancy. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74, 538–542.

20.

Massaro

D. W.

(1973). The perception of rotated shapes: A process analysis of shape constancy. Perception & Psychophysics, 13, 413–422.

21.

McManus

I. C.

Loo

P.-H.

Chamberlain

Riley

Brunswick

(2011). Does shape constancy relate to drawing ability? Two failures to replicate. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 29, 191–208.

22.

Mitchell

Ropar

Ackroyd

Rajendran

(2005). How perception impacts on drawings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 996–1003.

23.

Oliva

Torralba

(2007). The role of context in object recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 521–527.

24.

Olsen

R. K.

Pearl

Mayfield

Millar

(1976). Sensitivity to pictorial shape perspective in 5-year-old children and adults. Perception & Psychophysics, 20, 173–178.

25.

Ostrofsky

Cohen

D. J.

Kozbelt

(2014). Objective vs. subjective measures of face-drawing accuracy and their relations with perceptual constancies. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 486–497.

26.

Ostrofsky

Kozbelt

Seidel

(2012). Perceptual constancies and visual selection as predictors of realistic drawing skill. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 124–136.

27.

Palmer

S. E.

(1975). The effects of contextual scenes on the identification of objects. Memory & Cognition, 3, 519–526.

28.

Pizlo

(2008). 3D shape: Its unique place in visual perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

29.

Pizlo

Sawada

Kropatsch

W. G.

Steinman

R. M.

(2010). New approach to the perception of 3D shape based on veridicality, complexity, symmetry and volume. Vision Research, 50, 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2009.09.024

30.

Sedgwick

H. A.

(1986). Space perception. In Boff

K. R.

Kaufman

Thomas

J. P.

(Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance: Vol. 1. Sensory processes and perception (pp. 1–57). New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience.

31.

Sereno

M. E.

Trinath

Augath

Logothetis

N. K.

(2002). Three-dimensional shape representation in monkey cortex. Neuron, 33, 635–652.

32.

Thouless

R. H.

(1931a). Phenomenal regression to the real object. Part I. British Journal of Psychology, 21, 339–359.

33.

Thouless

R. H.

(1931b). Phenomenal regression to the real object. Part II. British Journal of Psychology, 22, 1–30.

34.

Tuffy

(2007). The effect of the third dimension on the perception of shape constancy (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Oregon, Eugene.

35.

Wallach

(1963). The perception of neutral colors. Scientific American, 208, 107–116.

36.

Welch

B. R

. (2000). Practical programming in Tcl and Tk (3rd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.59 MB

The Effects of Three-Dimensional Context on Shape Perception

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material