NYU PSYCH-GA 2223 - Sensory Cue Combination

Unformatted text preview:

11/14/20111G89.2223 PerceptionSensory Cue CombinationLaurence T. MaloneySome examples of cues to depthor shapeRetinal projection depends on size and distanceMonocular depth cuesEpstein (1965) familiar size experimentHow far away is the coin?Cast ShadowsShading and contour11/14/20112Texture1. Density2. Foreshortening3. SizeLinear perspectiveBinocular depth cuesVergence Angle As One Binocular SourceVergence Angle As One Binocular SourceVergence Angle As One Binocular Source11/14/20113Wheatstone stereoscope (c. 1838)Sir Charles WheatstoneDual mirror stereoscopeUncrossed disparityZero retinal disparityCrossed disparityDisparityzero disparityuncrossed disparitycrossed disparityFixation pointCues in conflictWhat cues?11/14/20114Ames room Ames roomAmes roomCue CombinationRock & Victor (1964)Visually and haptically specified shapes differed.What shape is perceived?View object through distorting lens while exploring object hapticallyIrv RockRock & Victor (1964)Experimental Design11/14/20115Rock & Victor (1964)Results1.90 0.98 1.8513.4 23.1 14.1 mm14.1 20.5 14.5 mmRock & Victor (1964)Results1.90 0.98 1.8513.4 23.1 14.1 mm14.1 20.5 14.5 mmVisual CaptureHow should we combine cues?VHSShaptic size estimatevisual size estimaterandom variablesModeling Cue Combination,,HV VHS Gaussian sS Gaussian strue locationsVSHSs,,HV VHS Gaussian sS Gaussian sstandard deviationsVSHSs11/14/20116location-scale familiessVS,V VS Gaussian sVVES s10 ,110 ,2HVS Gaussian cm cmS Gaussian cm cmsVSHS$10 if you are within1 cm of sWhich cue?Chances of winning?sVSHSCan we do better by combining cues?1VHSwS wSweighted linear combinationsVSHS1(1 )VHES wES wESws w s s sVSHS  1(1 )VHES wES wESws w s s Gaussian,S Gaussian s wWhat is SD?sVSHS2222 221(1 )VHVHVarS wVarS w VarSwwa parabola in w11/14/2011722 22(1 )VHVar S w w01w2V2H22 22(1 )VHVar S w w01w2V2Hcould it be?sVSHS2222222(1)!0VHHVHVar Swwww 01w2V2HsVSHS222HVHwsome examples ….22 22(1 )VHVar S w w01w2V2Hoptimal cue combinationeffective cue combinationRock & Victor (1964)Visually and haptically specified shapes differed.What shape is perceived?View object through distorting lens while exploring object hapticallyIrv RockWhy visual capture?11/14/20118Visual/Haptic SetupVisual Capture ?Why should vision be the “gold standard”all other modalities are compared to?SVH wVSV wHSHVarianceWeightswVH2V2H21VH21V21H2Visual Capture ?Why should vision be the “gold standard”all other modalities are compared to?SVHwVSVwHSHVarianceWeightswVH2V2H21VH21V21H2Visual Capture ?Why should vision be the “gold standard”all other modalities are compared to?SVH wVSV wHSHVarianceWeightswVH2V2H21VH21V21H2Visual Capture ?Why should vision be the “gold standard”all other modalities are compared to?SVHwVSVwHSHVarianceWeightswVH2V2H21VH21V21H211/14/20119Experimental Outline1) determine (& manipulate) within-modality variances• discrimination thresholds (2-IFC, constant stimuli) 2) make predictions for combined performance • using MLE model to predict weights & combined variance.3) measure combined performance & compare to prediction• similar to within-modality 2-IFC discrimination task (get PSE and thresholds) StandardComparisonno feedback!2‐IFC TaskVisual-HapticVisual-alone Haptic-aloneThree ConditionsPredictionsDetermining Within‐Modality Variance Determining Within‐Modality VarianceThresholdDetermining Within‐Modality VarianceThresholdDetermining Within‐Modality VarianceThreshold11/14/201110Determining Within‐Modality VarianceThresholdDetermining Within‐Modality VarianceThresholdFrom Variance to Thresholdvisual-haptic varianceestimators weightsPredicted weights for combined performance from within-modal dataPredicted combined threshold from within-modal datawVH2V2H2visual-haptic thresholdestimators weightswVJNDH2JNDV2 JNDH21JNDVH21JNDV21JNDH21VH21V21H2JNDi 2 iJNDi 2 iVisual‐Haptic DiscriminationVisual‐Haptic Discrimination Visual‐Haptic Discrimination11/14/201111Visual‐Haptic Discrimination Visual‐Haptic DiscriminationEmpirical Thresholds and Weights“visual capture”“haptic capture”Weights & PSEsIndividual DifferencesLASLASRSB1RSBMOEEmpirical Visual WeightMOEHTEHTEJWWJWWKMLKML0% noise133% noisePredicted Visual Weight0.80.60.40.2010.80.60.40.2Conclusions Combination reduces variance.  Linear weighting scheme for visual-haptic perception.  Explains behavior like “visual capture” or visual dominance.i.e, vision is given a weight of ~ 1.0 if the variance of the visual estimate is less then the variances of the other


View Full Document

NYU PSYCH-GA 2223 - Sensory Cue Combination

Download Sensory Cue Combination
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Sensory Cue Combination and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Sensory Cue Combination 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?