Abstract
The effects of familiar size and instructions (apparent, objective) on direct reports of size and distance were evaluated. Subjects estimated the size and distance of two different-sized playing cards or two unfamiliar stimuli under either apparent or objective instructions. The stimuli were presented successively at a distance of 5.48 m under reduced-cue conditions. The form of the instructions selectively influenced the effect of familiar size on absolute judgments of size and distance, with apparent instructions minimizing, and objective instructions promoting, familiar-size effects. The ratio of the distance judgments of the first to the second presented stimuli approximated the relative retinal sizes of the two objects under both apparent and objective instructions, while the ratio of size judgments tended to be either influenced by or independent of the object’s relative retinal sizes under apparent and objective instructions, respectively. These results are consistent with Gogel’s theory of off-size perception and, in particular, with the claim that, in comparison with apparent instructions, objective instructions are more likely to direct observers to base their judgments on cognitive, as opposed to perceptual, sources of spatial information.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
05 February 2022
The author name was mispelled during the original upload. It should be John Predebon instead of John Fredebon.
References
Carlson, V. R. (1960). Overestimation in size constancy judgments.American Journal of Psychology,73, 199–213.
Carlson, V. R. (1977). Instructions and perceptual constancy judgments. In W. Epstein (Ed.),Stability and constancy in visual perception: Mechanisms and processes (pp. 217–254). New York: Wiley.
Epstein, W. (1967).Varieties of perceptual learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Epstein, W., &Landauer, A. A. (1969). Size and distance judgments under reduced conditions of viewing.Perception & Psychophysics,6, 269–272.
Gogel, W. C (1968). The measurement of perceived size and distance. in W. D. Neff (Ed.),Contributions to sensory physiology (Vol. 3, pp. 125–148). New York: Academic Press.
Gogel, W. C. (1969a). The absolute and relative size cues to distance.American Journal of Psychology,82, 228–234.
Gogel, W. C. (1969b). The effect of object familiarity on the perception of size and distance.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,21, 239–247.
Gogel, W. C. (1969c). The sensing of retinal size.Vision Research,9, 1079–1094.
Gogel, W. C. (1973). The organization of perceived space: II. Consequences of perceptual interactions.Psychologische Forschung,36, 223–247.
Gogel, W. C. (1976). An indirect method of measuring perceived distance from familiar size.Perception & Psychophysics,20, 419–429.
Gogel, W. C. (1981). The role of suggested size in distance responses.Perception & Psychophysics,30, 149–155.
Gogel, W. C., &Da Silva, J. A. (1987a). Familiar size and the theory of off-sized perceptions.Perception & Psychophysics,41, 318–328.
Gogel, W. C., &Da Silva, J. A. (1987b). A two-process theory of the response to size and distance.Perception &. Psychophysics,41, 220–238.
Gogel, W. C., &Newton, R. E. (1969). Perception of off-sized objects.Perception & Psychophysics,5, 7–9.
Gogel, W. C., &Sturm, R. D. (1971). Directional separation and the size cue to distance.Psychologische Forschung,35, 57–80.
Gogel, W. C., &Tietz, J. D. (1973). Absolute motion parallax and the specific distance tendency.Perception & Psychophysics,13, 284–292.
Higashiyama, A. (1977). Perceived size and distance as a perceptual conflict between two processing modes.Perception & Psychophysics,22, 206–211.
Higashiyama, A. (1984). The effects of familiar size on judgments of size and distance: An interaction of viewing attitude with spatial cues.Perception & Psychophysics,35, 305–312.
Joynson, R. B. (1949). The problem of size and distance.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,1, 119–135.
Leibowitz, H. W., &Harvey, L. O., Jr. (1969). Effect of instructions, environment, and type of test object on matched size.Journal of Experimental Psychology,81, 36–43.
Mack, A. (1978). Three modes of visual perception. In H. L. Pick, Jr., & E. Saltzman (Eds.),Modes of perceiving and processing information (pp. 171–186). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mershon, D. H., &Gogel, W. C. (1975). Failure of familiar size to determine a metric for visually perceived distance.Perception & Psychophysics,17, 101–106.
Mershon, D. H., Kennedy, M., &Falcara, G. (1977). On the use of calibration equations in perception research.Perception,6, 299–311.
Predebon, G. M., Wenderoth, P. M., &Curthoys, I. A. (1974). The effects of instructions and distance on judgments of off-size familiar objects under natural viewing conditions.American Journal of Psychology,87, 425–439.
Rock, I. (1983).The logic of perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sedgwick, H. A. (1986), Space perception. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.),Handbook of perception and human performance: Vol 1. Sensory processes and perception (pp. 21.1–21.57). New York: Wiley.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research formed part of a doctoral dissertation, supervised by P. Wenderoth, conducted while the author held an Australian Postgraduate Research Award. Preparation of this report was supported by Australian Research Council Grant A78930099.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Predebon, J. The role of instructions and familiar size in absolute judgments of size and distance. Perception & Psychophysics 51, 344–354 (1992). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211628
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211628