Abstract
Observers were required to make comparative judgments of the distal sizes of squares at various perceived distances in a pictorial array. It was predicted that observers would normalize distance prior to judgment. Chronometric analyses indicated that the time to make “same” judgments increased systematically with the relative distance of the two stimuli. The time required to make “different” judgments depended on the nature of the difference. When the stimuli differed in proximal size, distal size, and distance, response time increased with distance ratio. However, when the stimuli differed in distal size and distance but not proximal size, response time decreased with distance ratio. In addition, when the stimuli differed in both distal and proximal size but not distance, RT decreased with size ratio. These results are consistent with a class of models that incorporate distance normalization into the comparative size-judging process. These and alternative models are discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Reference Notes
Pringle, R.Development of the normalization strategy in comparative numerosity judgments. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Psychonomic Society, St. Louis, 1980.
Pringle, R., & Nagel, J. A.The role of the standard in magnitude estimations of numerousness: Evidence for normalization and “laying-off” processes. Paper presented at the Eastern Psychological Association Meetings, Baltimore, 1982.
References
Alpern, M. Effector mechanisms in vision. In J. W. Kling & L. Riggs (Eds.),Experimental psychology (3rd edition). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1971.
Baird, J. C.The psychophysical analysis of visual space. New York: Pergamon Press, 1970.
Bundesen, C., &Larsen, A. Visual transformation of size.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1975,1, 214–220.
Broota, K. D., &Epstein, W. The time it takes to make veridical size and distance judgments.Perception & Psychophysics, 1973,14, 358–364.
Cooper, L. A., &Shepard, R. N. Transformations in representations of objects in space. In E. C. Carterette & M. P. Friedman (Eds.),Handbook of perception (Vol. 8):Perceptual coding. New York: Academic Press, 1978.
Corballis, M. C., &Roldan, C. E. Detection of symmetry as a function of angular orientation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1975,1, 221–230.
Dixon, P. Numerical comparison processes.Memory & Cognition, 1978,6, 454–461.
Dixon, P., &Just, M. A. Normalization of irrelevant dimensions in stimulus comparisons.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1978,4, 36–46.
Epstein, W., &Broota, K. D. Attitude of judgment and reaction time in estimation of size at a distance.Perception & Psychophysics, 1975,18, 201–204.
Gibson, J. J.The perception of the visual world. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1950.
Gibson, J. J.The senses considered as perceptual systems. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1966.
Gibson, J. J. The information available in pictures.Leonardo, 1971,4, 27–35.
Hagen, M. A. An outline of an investigation into the spatial character of pictures. In H. L. Pick & J. E. Saltzman (Eds.),Modes of perceiving and processing information. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1978.
Hagen, M. A., &Jones, R. L. Cultural effects on pictorial perception: How many words is one picture really worth? In R. D. Walk & H. L. Pick (Eds.),Perception and experience (Vol. 6). New York: Plenum Press, 1978.
Hartley, A. A. Mental measurement in the magnitude estimation of length.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1977,3, 622–628.
Hartley, A. A. Mental measurement of line length: The role of the standard.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1981,7, 309–317.
Hochberg, J., &Gellman, L. The effect of landmark features on mental rotation times.Memory & Cognition, 1977,5, 23–26.
Johnson, D. M. Confidence and speed in the two-category judgment.Archives of Psychology (New York), 1939,34, No. 241.
Pringle, R. Perceived number equivalence by adults and children: A normalization model of size-density coordination (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University, 1979).
Pringle, R., &Cowan, T. M. Mental rotation of possible and impossible four-cornered toruses.Perception & Psychophysics, 1978,24, 84–92.
Saslow, M. G. Effects of components of displacement-step stimuli upon latency for saccadic eye movement.Journal of the Optical Society of America, 1967,57, 1024–1030. (a)
Saslow, M. G. Latency for saccadic eye movement.Journal of the Optical Society of America, 1967,57, 1030–1033. (b)
Smith, O. W., &Gruber, H. Perception of depth in photographs.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1958,8, 307–313.
Smith, O. W., Smith, T. C., &Hubbard, D. Perceived distance as a function of the method of presenting perspective.American Journal of Psychology, 1958,71, 662–675.
Snodgrass, J. G. Psychophysics. In B. Scharf (Ed.),Experimental sensory psychology. Glenview, Ill: Scott, Foresman, 1975.
Uhlarik, J., Pringle, R., Jordan, K., &Misceo, G. Size scaling in two-dimensional pictorial arrays.Perception & Psychophysics, 1980,27, 60–70.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pringle, R., Uhlarik, J. Comparative judgments of distal size: A chronometric analysis. Perception & Psychophysics 32, 178–186 (1982). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204277
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204277