Development of size constancy in children: A test of the proximal mode sensitivity hypothesis
In two experiments, we attempted to replicate Shallo and Rock’s (1988) finding that 5- and 6-yearold children exhibit size constancy for a distant object when tested with comparison objects that are matched for visual angle. Experiment 1 (N = 80) included four age groups: 5-, 6-, and 9-year-olds and adults. Participants viewed one standard object from 61 m and indicated which of nine nearby comparison objects matched the standard object in size. The comparison objects subtended equal visual angles in one condition and different visual angles in another. In both conditions, the 5- and 6-year-old children underestimated the size of the standard object, whereas the 9-year-old children and adults made nearly accurate size estimates. In Experiment 2 (N = 32), we replicated the finding that 6-yearold children underestimate size when tested with comparison objects that subtend equal visual angles. Our results conflict with those of Shallo and Rock and support earlier findings that young children do not exhibit size constancy for distant objects.
- Brislin, R. W., &Leibowitz, H. W. (1970). The effect of separation between test and comparison objects on size constancy at various age-levels.American Journal of Psychology,83, 372–376. CrossRef
- Carlson, V. R. (1960). Overestimation in size-constancy judgments.American Journal of Psychology,73, 199–213. CrossRef
- Epstein, W. (1963). Attitudes of judgment and the size-distance invariance hypothesis.Journal of Experimental Psychology,66, 78–83. CrossRef
- Gilinsky, A. S. (1955). The effect of attitude upon the perception of size.American Journal of Psychology,68, 173–192. CrossRef
- Granrud, C. E. (2004). Visual metacognition and the development of size constancy. In D. T. Levin (Ed.),Thinking and seeing: Visual metacognition in adults and children (pp. 75–95). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Granrud, C. E., & Morreale, M. A. (2001, April).The role of perceptual knowledge in the development of size constancy. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, MN.
- Leibowitz, H. W. (1974). Multiple mechanisms of size perception and size constancy.Hiroshima Forum for Psychology,1, 47–53.
- Leibowitz, H. W., Pollard, S. W., &Dickson, D. (1967). Monocular and binocular size-matching as a function of distance at various agelevels.American Journal of Psychology,80, 263–268. CrossRef
- Rapoport, J. L. (1967). Attitude and size judgment in school age children.Child Development,38, 1187–1192. CrossRef
- Rapoport, J. L. (1969). Size-constancy in children measured by a functional size-discrimination task.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,7, 366–373. CrossRef
- Rock, I. (1983).The logic of perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Shallo, J. (1984).Size perception in children: Evidence for dual mode processing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ.
- Shallo, J., &Rock, I. (1988). Size constancy in children: A new interpretation.Perception,17, 803–813. CrossRef
- Zeigler, H. P., &Leibowitz, H. [W.] (1957). Apparent visual size as a function of distance for children and adults.American Journal of Psychology,70, 106–109. CrossRef
- Development of size constancy in children: A test of the proximal mode sensitivity hypothesis
Perception & Psychophysics
Volume 68, Issue 8 , pp 1372-1381
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Additional Links
- Industry Sectors