Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 236, Issue 6, pp 1603–1609 | Cite as

Underestimation of large distances in active and passive locomotion

  • Heiko Hecht
  • Max Ramdohr
  • Christoph von Castell
Research Article


Our ability to estimate distances, be it verbally or by locomotion, is exquisite at close range (action space). At distances above 100 m (vista space), verbal estimates continue to be quite accurate, whereas locomotor estimates have been found to be grossly underestimated. Until now, however, the latter have been performed on a treadmill, which might not translate to real-world walking. We investigated if the motor underestimation found on the treadmill holds up in a natural environment. Observers viewed pictures of objects at distances between 10 and 245 m and were asked to reproduce these distances in a blindfolded walking task (using passive movement or an active production method). Active and passive locomotor judgments underestimated far distances above 100 m. We conclude that underestimation of large distances does not depend on the medium (treadmill vs. real-world) but rather on the sensory modality and effort involved in the task.


Distance perception Vista space Locomotor judgment Underestimation Natural environment 



We thank Agnes Münch for her support. CvC was supported by Deutsche Forschungsgesellschaft (German Research Foundation), grant “Innenraumwahrnehmung” [Grant numbers HE 2122/10-2 (Heiko Hecht) and OB 346/5-2 (Daniel Oberfeld)].


  1. Andre J, Rogers S (2006) Using verbal and blind-walking distance estimates to investigate the two visual systems hypothesis. Perception Psychophys 68(3):353–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bach M (1996) The Freiburg visual acuity test—automatic measurement of visual acuity. Optom Vis Sci 73(1):49–53CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergmann J, Krauß E, Münch A, Jungmann R, Oberfeld D, Hecht H (2011) Locomotor and verbal distance judgments in action and vista space. Exp Brain Res 210(1):13–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. L. Erlbaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  5. Daum SO, Hecht H (2009) Distance estimation in vista space. Atten Percept Psychophys 71(5):1127–1137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Gibson EJ, Bergman R (1954) The effect of training on absolute estimation of distance over the ground. J Exp Psychol 48(6):473CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Gibson EJ, Bergman R, Purdy J (1955) The effect of prior training with a scale of distance on absolute and relative judgments of distance over ground. J Exp Psychol 50(2):97CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Grüsser O (1983) Multimodal structure of the extra personal space. In: Hein A, Jeannerod J (eds) Spatially oriented behavior. Springer, New York, pp 327–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. He ZJ, Wu B, Ooi TL, Yarbrough G, Wu J (2004) Judging egocentric distance on the ground: Occlusion and surface integration. Perception 33(7):789–806CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Hochberg Y (1988) A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika 75(4):800–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Iosa M, Fusco A, Morone G, Paolucci S (2012) Walking there: environmental influence on walking-distance estimation. Behav Brain Res 226(1):124–132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Lappe M, Jenkin M, Harris LR (2007) Travel distance estimation from visual motion by leaky path integration. Exp Brain Res 180(1):35–48CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Lappin JS, Shelton AL, Rieser JJ (2006) Environmental context influences visually perceived distance. Percep Psychophys 68(4):571–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Loomis JM, Knapp JM (2003) Visual perception of egocentric distance in real and virtual environments. Virtual Adapt Environ 11:21–46Google Scholar
  15. Loomis JM, Da Silva JA, Fujita N, Fukusima SS (1992) Visual space perception and visually directed action. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 18(4):906CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Meng JC, Sedgwick HA (2002) Distance perception across spatial discontinuities. Percep Psychophys 64(1):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Philbeck JW, Loomis JM (1997) Comparison of two indicators of perceived egocentric distance under full-cue and reduced-cue conditions. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 23(1):72CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Proffitt DR, Stefanucci J, Banton T, Epstein W (2003) The role of effort in perceiving distance. Psychol Sci 14(2):106–112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Rieser JJ, Ashmead DH, Talor CR, Youngquist GA (1990) Visual perception and the guidance of locomotion without vision to previously seen targets. Perception 19(5):675–689CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Sadalla EK, Magel SG (1980) The perception of traversed distance. Environ Behav 12(1):65–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sinai MJ, Ooi TL, He ZJ (1998) Terrain influences the accurate judgement of distance. Nature 395(6701):497–500CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Trinkler I, Jarchow T (2000) Non visual reproduction of long distances. In: Bülthoff H, Fahle M, Gegenfurtner KR, Mallot HA (eds) Beiträge zur 3. Tübinger Wahrnehmungskonferenz. Knirsch-Verlag, Kirchentellinsfurt, p 140Google Scholar
  23. Witt JK, Proffitt DR, Epstein W (2004) Perceiving distance: a role of effort and intent. Perception 33(5):577–590CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Psychologisches InstitutJohannes Gutenberg-Universität MainzMainzGermany

Personalised recommendations