↓ Skip to main content

Anisotropic perception of slant from texture gradient: Size contrast hypothesis

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Anisotropic perception of slant from texture gradient: Size contrast hypothesis
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, November 2015
DOI 10.3758/s13414-015-1024-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Atsuki Higashiyama, Tadashi Yamazaki

Abstract

When we see an optical pattern that has a gradient of the size and/or density of its texture elements, we often perceive a surface that is slanted in depth. Our inquiry was to ask whether the effect of a texture gradient depends on the direction of the gradient (ground, ceiling, and sidewall patterns) or on the position of the observer's head (upward, forward, or downward). In Experiments 1 and 2, a total of 63 observers judged the apparent slant of polka-dot, grid, or flagstone patterns; regardless of head position, the ground patterns were judged to be closer to the frontal plane than were the other patterns. This means that there is a visual anisotropy in head-centric slant perception. To explain this result, we assumed accumulated positional effects of size contrast-that is, a tendency to perceive the size of the upper part of visual space to be larger than the size of the lower part. This hypothesis was examined in two subsequent experiments by reducing the size contrast among the texture elements. When 23 observers viewed regularly arranged same-sized-dot patterns with gradients of the interdot interval and with linear perspective of the dotted lines, anisotropic effects were still detected. When 22 observers viewed dynamic random-dot patterns with gradients of velocity, the anisotropic effects mentioned above were removed in many cases, and the ceiling patterns were sometimes judged to be less slanted than the other patterns. These results partially support the size contrast hypothesis and were compared with the predictions from other hypotheses.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 3 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Researcher 2 17%
Student > Master 1 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 2 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 58%
Computer Science 1 8%
Engineering 1 8%
Unknown 3 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 November 2016.
All research outputs
#16,287,458
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#848
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,839
of 393,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#25
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 393,856 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.