File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Center bias in perceived heading from optic flow

TitleCenter bias in perceived heading from optic flow
Authors
Issue Date2016
PublisherAssociation for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology. The Journal's web site is located at http://wwwjournalofvisionorg/
Citation
The 2016 Annual Meeting of the Vision Science Society (VSS 2016), St. Pete Beach, FL., 13-18 May 2016. In Journal of vision, 2016, v. 16 n. 12, p. 884 How to Cite?
AbstractJudgments of heading direction from optic flow often show a bias toward the center of the display, but this has not been systematically investigated. We measured center bias in conditions with varied optic flow information, and tested the coordinate frame of the bias. Observers viewed 3.5s displays of simulated self-motion presented on a head-mounted-display, and indicated their perceived heading direction with a cursor. As a measure of center bias, we estimated the slope of the linear relationship between simulated and judged heading direction. Four simulated environments were tested: a textured ground plane with scattered posts, a textured ground plane alone, a cloud of fixed dots, and a cloud of randomly drifting dots. We also varied field of view (100°x64° vs. 66°x40°) and simulated observer speed (1 m/s vs. 4 m/s). We found that center bias varied systematically with the quality of optic flow information. Biases were larger for a ground plane alone than with scattered posts, and for a noisy dot cloud than a rigid dot cloud. Biases decreased with larger field of view and faster speed. To rule out response bias, we varied the distribution of simulated heading directions. Similar results were observed when heading directions were sampled from an M-shaped distribution, suggesting that biases are perceptual. To test the coordinate frame of the bias, we varied the orientation of the head relative to the body (±10°), and found that biases followed the direction of the head and display. Our results are consistent with the influence of a Bayesian prior that prefers heading directions aligned with the head or gaze. The effect of such a prior would depend on the reliability of optic flow information, as observed here. This model could be implemented with center-weighted templates, which have been proposed to account for other findings. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2016
DescriptionOpen Access Journal
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/235272
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.341
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.042

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorXing, X-
dc.contributor.authorSaunders, J-
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-14T13:52:16Z-
dc.date.available2016-10-14T13:52:16Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.citationThe 2016 Annual Meeting of the Vision Science Society (VSS 2016), St. Pete Beach, FL., 13-18 May 2016. In Journal of vision, 2016, v. 16 n. 12, p. 884-
dc.identifier.issn1534-7362-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/235272-
dc.descriptionOpen Access Journal-
dc.description.abstractJudgments of heading direction from optic flow often show a bias toward the center of the display, but this has not been systematically investigated. We measured center bias in conditions with varied optic flow information, and tested the coordinate frame of the bias. Observers viewed 3.5s displays of simulated self-motion presented on a head-mounted-display, and indicated their perceived heading direction with a cursor. As a measure of center bias, we estimated the slope of the linear relationship between simulated and judged heading direction. Four simulated environments were tested: a textured ground plane with scattered posts, a textured ground plane alone, a cloud of fixed dots, and a cloud of randomly drifting dots. We also varied field of view (100°x64° vs. 66°x40°) and simulated observer speed (1 m/s vs. 4 m/s). We found that center bias varied systematically with the quality of optic flow information. Biases were larger for a ground plane alone than with scattered posts, and for a noisy dot cloud than a rigid dot cloud. Biases decreased with larger field of view and faster speed. To rule out response bias, we varied the distribution of simulated heading directions. Similar results were observed when heading directions were sampled from an M-shaped distribution, suggesting that biases are perceptual. To test the coordinate frame of the bias, we varied the orientation of the head relative to the body (±10°), and found that biases followed the direction of the head and display. Our results are consistent with the influence of a Bayesian prior that prefers heading directions aligned with the head or gaze. The effect of such a prior would depend on the reliability of optic flow information, as observed here. This model could be implemented with center-weighted templates, which have been proposed to account for other findings. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2016-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherAssociation for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology. The Journal's web site is located at http://wwwjournalofvisionorg/-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of vision-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License-
dc.titleCenter bias in perceived heading from optic flow-
dc.typeConference_Paper-
dc.identifier.emailSaunders, J: jsaun@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authoritySaunders, J=rp00638-
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1167/16.12.884-
dc.identifier.hkuros268014-
dc.identifier.volume16-
dc.identifier.issue12-
dc.identifier.spage884-
dc.identifier.epage884-
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats