Skip to main content
Download PDF

The vista paradox: A natural visual illusion

Perception & Psychophysics volume 45, pages 43–48 (1989)Cite this article

Abstract

Suppose an observer views a distant object through a window in the far wall of a room or corridor—a visual scene consituting a vista. If the observer moves toward the window, then the distant object will shrink in apparent size and appear farther away. These effects are paradoxical, because the distant object appears smaller as its visual angle increases. The vista paradox occurs under many other real-world conditions, such as viewing a distant object while moving out of the mouth of a valley, or driving across a topographic crest. In the present study, framing effects and the equidistance tendency are considered as possible factors. However, an explanation based on the dynamic relationship between the visual angle of the framing portion of a vista and the visual angle of a distant object appears more promising.

References

  • Baird, J. C. (1982). The moon illusion: II. A reference theory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,111, 304–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boring, E. G. (1940). Size constancy and Emmert’s law.American Journal of Psychology,53, 293–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birgell, M., Uhlarik, J., &Goldhorn, P. (1977). Contextual influences on judgments of linear extent.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,3, 105–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, W., &Landauer, A. A. (1969). Size and distance judgments under reduced conditions of viewing.Perception & Psychophysics,6, 269–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, W., Park, J., &Casey, A. (1961). The current status of the stze-distance hypothesis.Psychological Bulletin,58, 491–514.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fellows, B. J. (1968). The reverse Miiller-Lyer illusion and “enclosure”.British Journal of Psychology,59, 369–372.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gogel, W. C. (1965a). Equidistance tendency and its consequences.Psychological Bulletin,64, 153–163.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gogel, W. C. (1965b). Size cues and the adjacency principle.Journal of Experimental Psychology,70, 289–293.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holway, A. H., &Boring, E. G. (1941). Determinants of apparent visual size with distance variant.American Journal of Psychology,54, 21–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judd, C. H. (1898). An optical illusion.Psychological Review,5, 286–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraft, C. L., Farell, R. J., & Boucek, G. P. (1970). Visual performance from the 737 cab as a function of pilots’ position within the cab. Unpublished technical report, The Boeing Co., Seattle, WA.

  • Künnapas, T. M. (1955). Influence of frame size on apparent length of line.Journal of Experimental Psychology,50, 168–170.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Over, R. (1963). Size and distance-estimates of a single stimulus under different viewing conditions.American Journal of Psychology,76, 452–457.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Random House Dictionary. (1983). New York: Random House.

  • Restle, F. (1970). Moon illusion explained on the basis of relative size.Science,167, 1092–1096.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Restle, F. (1971). Visual illusions. In M. H. Appley (Ed.),Adaptationlevel theory: A symposium (pp. 55–69). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roscoe, S. N. (1980). Visual judgments of size and distance. In S. N. Roscoe (Ed.),Avian’on psychology (pp. 97–107). Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senders, J. W. (1966). The coffee cup illusion.American Journal of Psychology,79, 143–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weintraub, D. J., &Schneck, M. K. (1986). Fragments of Delbouef and Ebbinghaus illusions: Contour/context explorations of misjudged circle size.Perception & Psychophysics,40, 147–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weintraub, D. J., Wilson, B. A., Greene, R. D., &Palmquist, M. J. (1969). Delbouef illusion: Displacement versus diameter, arc deletions, and brightness contrast.Journal of Experimental Psychology,80, 505–511.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Missouri-St. Louis, 63121, St. Louis, MO

    James T. Walker, Reta C. Rupich & Jack L. Powell

Authors
  1. James T. Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Reta C. Rupich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jack L. Powell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This paper has profited greatly from discussions with several people before and after an oral presentation at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society in Minneapolis, MN, November 11, 1982.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walker, J.T., Rupich, R.C. & Powell, J.L. The vista paradox: A natural visual illusion. Perception & Psychophysics 45, 43–48 (1989). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208031

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208031

Keywords

  • Visual Angle
  • Visual Scene
  • Distant Object
  • Apparent Size
  • Adjustment Procedure