This study investigated the effects of light type (spot, directional, and point), forward-rotated stimulus angle (20°, 45°, and 70°), and surface texture (wood, metal, transparent glass, dark brown leather, and translucent plastic) on errors in the estimated vertical diameter of a three-dimensional object. Twenty female and 12 male Taiwanese college students, ages 18–22 years, participated in the current study. Participants were asked to judge the vertical diameter of an elliptical hole within a square plate that was displayed on an LCD monitor. Analysis indicated that the errors in estimated vertical diameter for rotated angles of 20° and 45° were greater than were those for 70°. Additionally, the error of estimated vertical diameter for a rotated angle of 45° was less than was that for 20°. The surface texture also affected errors in estimated vertical diameter: transparent glass was associated with more errors than were wood and metal textures. However, light type had no effect on errors in estimated vertical diameter. These results have implications for the graphics-based design of interfaces.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsW. J. (2007) A common light-prior for visual search, shape and reflectance judgments. Journal of Vision, 7(11), 1–7.
2.
AshleyM. L. (1898) Concerning the significance of intensity of light in visual estimates. Psychological Review, 5(6), 595–615.
BraunsteinM. L.SauerG. W.FeriaC. S. (2002) Perceived internal depth in rotating and translating objects. Perception, 31, 943–954.
5.
CharrasP.LupianezJ. (2009) The relevance of symmetry in line length perception. Perception, 38, 1428–1438.
6.
ChenV. J.CiceroneC. M. (2002) Depth from subjective color and apparent motion. Vision Research, 42, 2131–2135.
7.
CockburnA.McKenzieB. (2001) What do web users do? An empirical analysis of web use. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54, 903–922.
8.
DurandJ. B.NelissenK.JolyO.WardakC.ToddJ. T.NormanJ. F.JanssenP.VanduffelW.OrbanG. A. (2007) Anterior regions of monkey parietal cortex process visual 3D shape. Neuro, 55(3), 493–505.
9.
EdwardsA. S. (1953) The relation of light intensity to accuracy of depth perception. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 37(4), 300–301.
10.
GuibalC. R. C.DrespB. (2004) Interaction of color and geometric cues in depth perception: when does red mean near?Psychological Research, 69, 30–40.
11.
HanadaM. (2005) Effects of circular motion on judgment of rotation direction and depth order in visual motion. Japanese Psychological Research, 47(4), 251–261.
12.
HuangK. C. (2007) Effects of colored light, color of comparison stimulus, and illumination on error in perceived depth with binocular and monocular viewing. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 104, 1205–1216.
13.
KoenderinkJ. J.KappersA. M. L.ToddJ. T.NormanJ. E.PhillipsF. (1996) Surface range and attitude probing in stereoscopically presented dynamic scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22(4), 869–878.
14.
LawsonR. (1999) Achieving visual object constancy across plane rotation and depth rotation. Acta Psychologica, 102, 221–245.
15.
LawsonR. (2004) View sensitivity increases for same-shape matches if mismatches show pairs of more similar shapes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 896–902.
16.
LawsonR.BülthoffH. H. (2008) Using morphs of familiar objects to examine how shape discriminability influences view sensitivity. Perception & Psychophysics, 70 (5), 853–877.
17.
LeeG.EastmanC. M.TaunkT.HoC. H. (2010) Usability principles and best practices for the user interface design of complex 3D architectural design and engineering tools. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68, 90–104.
18.
LiA.ZaidiQ. (2003) Observer strategies in perception of 3-D shape from isotropic textures: developable surfaces. Vision Research, 43, 2741–2758.
19.
LiuB.CooperL. A. (2003) Explicit and implicit memory for rotating objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 554–562.
20.
LiuB.ToddJ. T. (2004) Perceptual biases in the interpretation of 3D shape from shading. Vision Research, 44, 2135–2145.
NormanJ. F.BartholomewA. N.BurtonC. L. (2008) Aging preserves the ability to perceive 3D object shape from static but not deforming boundary contours. Acta Psychologica, 129, 198–207.
23.
NormanJ. F.DawsonT. E.RainesS. R. (2000) The perception and recognition of natural object shape from deforming and static shadows. Perception, 29, 135–148.
24.
NormanJ. F.RainesS. R. (2002) The perception and discrimination of local 3D surface structure from deforming and disparate boundary contours. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 1145–1159.
25.
NormanJ. F.ToddJ. T.OrbanG. A. (2004) Perception of three-dimensional shape from specular highlights, deformations of shading, and other types of visual information. Psychological Science, 15, 565–570.
26.
NormanJ. F.ToddJ. T.PerottiV. J.TittleJ. S. (1996) The visual perception of three-dimensional length. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22(1), 173–186.
27.
OrbanG. A. (2011) The extraction of 3D shape in the visual system of human and non-human primates. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 34, 361–388.
28.
OzokA. A.KomlodiA. (2009) Better in 3D? An empirical investigation of user satisfaction and preferences concerning two-dimensional and three-dimensional product representations in business-to-consumer e-commerce. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 25(4), 243–281.
29.
PalmerS. E.BrooksJ. L. (2008) Edge-region grouping in figure-ground organization and depth perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1353–1371.
30.
PalmerS. E.GhoseT. (2008) External edges: a powerful cue to depth perception and figure-ground organization. Psychological Science, 19, 77–84.
31.
PhillipsF.ToddJ. T.KoenderinkJ. J.KappersA. M. (1997) Perceptual localization of surface position. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23(5), 1481–1492.
32.
PizloZ.SawadaT.LiY.KropatschW. G.SteinmanR. M. (2010) New approach to the perception of 3D shape based on veridicality, complexity, symmetry and volume. Vision Research, 50, 1–11.
33.
PrinzmetalW.GettlemanL. (1993) Vertical-horizontal illusion: one eye is better than two. Perception & Psychophysics, 53, 81–88.
34.
SannaA.MontrucchioB. (2001) 3D technologies and products for e-commerce on the Web. Software Focus, 2(4), 157–163.
35.
SchreiberK.CrawfordJ. D.FetterM.TweedD. (2001) The motor side of depth vision. Nature, 410, 819–822.
36.
SeguraA.ArizkurenI.AraburuI.TelleriaI. (2005) High quality parametric visual product configuration systems over the Web. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on 3D Web Technology, 159–167.
37.
SuyamaS.OhtsukaS.TakadaH.UehiraK.SaraiS. (2004) Apparent 3-D image perceived from luminance-modulated two 2-D images displayed at different depths. Vision Research, 44, 785–793.
38.
TarrM. J. (1989) Orientation dependence in three dimensional object recognition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. MA: Cambridge.
39.
ThomasG.GoldbergJ. H.CannonD. J.HillisS. L. (2002) Surface texture improve the robustness of stereoscopic depth cues. Human Factors, 44(1), 157–170.
40.
ToddJ. T. (2004) The visual perception of 3D shape. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(3), 115–121.
41.
ToddJ. T.KoenderinkJ. J.van DoornA. J.KappersA. M. L. (1996) Effects of changing viewing conditions on the perceived structure of smoothly curved surfaces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22(3), 695–706.
42.
VelisavljevicL.ElderJ. H. (2006) Texture properties affecting the accuracy of surface attitude judgments. Vision Research, 46, 2166–2191.
43.
VuongQ. C.TarrM. J. (2004) Rotation direction affects object recognition. Vision Research, 44, 1717–1730.
44.
YamauchiY.UchikawaK. (2005) Depth information affects judgment of the surface-color mode appearance. Journal of Vision, 5, 515–524.
