An almost general theory of mean size perception (original) (raw)
Related papers
Obligatory averaging in mean size perception
Vision Research, 2014
The perception of ensemble characteristics is often regarded as an antidote to an established bottleneck in focused attention and working memory, both of which appear to be limited in capacity to a few objects only. In order to test the associative law of summation, observers were asked to estimate the mean size of four circles relative to a reference circle. When there was no time to scrutinize each individual circle, observers discriminated the mean size difference identically, irrespective of whether the same summary size increment or decrement was added to or subtracted from the size of only one, two, or all four circles. Since observers judged the size of individual circles, the position of which was indicated after they were displayed, considerably less accurately than the mean size of the four circles, it is very unlikely that explicit knowledge of the size of the individual elements is the basis of mean size judgments. The sizes of individual elements were pooled together in an obligatory manner before size information had reached awareness. The processing of size information seems to be largely constrained to only one measure at a time, with a preference for mean size rather than the individual measures from which it is assembled.
On the nature of the stimulus information necessary for estimating mean size of visual arrays
Journal of Vision, 2009
This paper explores the nature of the representations used for computing mean visual size of an array of visual objects of different sizes. In Experiment 1 we found that mean size judgments are accurately made even when the individual objects (circles) upon which those judgments were based were distributed between the two eyes. Mean size judgments were impaired, however, when a subset of the constituent objects involved in the estimation of mean size were rendered invisible by interocular suppression. These findings suggest that mean size is computed from relatively refined stimulus information represented at stages of visual processing beyond those involved in binocular combination and interocular suppression. In Experiment 2 we used an attentional blink paradigm to learn whether this refined information was susceptible to the constraints of attention. Accuracy of mean size judgments was unchanged when one of the two arrays of circles was presented within a rapid serial visual presentation sequence, regardless of task requirement (single vs. dual task) and the array's time of presentation relative to the brief appearance of a target that was the focus of attention. Evidently the refined stimulus information used for computing mean size remains available even in the absence of focused attention.
Impact of spatial grouping on mean size estimation
Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2018
People represent summary statistics of visual scenes, but it is not fully clear whether such summary statistics are extracted automatically. To determine whether different levels of summary representation (i.e., at the perceptual-group or the entire-display level) may be formed differently, in two experiments we investigated how people extracted summary statistics for displays consisting of spatially segregated groups. Participants were asked to report the mean sizes of either entire sets or perceptual groups in precue and postcue conditions. There was no precueing advantage in the mean size estimations of entire sets. However, when these precues identified target perceptual groups, participants reported the perceptual-group means more accurately than when postcues were used. In the postcue condition, participants were biased toward the entire-set mean even when they were probed to report the perceptual-group mean. There was also greater bias toward the entire-set mean for more erro...
Perception of means, sums, and areas
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 2020
In this age of data visualization, it is important to understand our perception of the symbols that are used. For example, does the perceived size of a disc correspond most closely to its area, diameter, circumference, or some other measure? When multiple items are present, this becomes a question of ensemble perception. Here, we compare observers' performance across three different tasks: judgments of (i) the mean diameter, (ii) the total diameter, or (iii) the total area of (N = 1, 2, 3, or 7) test circles compared with a single reference circle. We draw a parallel between Anne Treisman's feature integration theory and Daniel Kahneman's cognitive systems, comparing the preattentive stage to System 1, and the focused attention stage to System 2. In accordance with Kahneman's prediction, average size (diameter) of the geometric figures can be judged with considerable accuracy, but the total diameter of the same figures cannot. Like the total length, the cumulative area covered by circles was also judged considerably less accurately than the mean diameter. Differences in efficiency between these three tasks illustrate powerful constraints upon visual processing: The visual system is well adapted for the perception of the mean size while there are no analogous mechanisms for the accurate perception of the total length or cumulative area. Thus, in visualizing data, using bubble charts proportional to area may be misleading as our visual system seems better adapted to perceive disc size by the radius rather than the area.
Sample size bias in judgments of perceptual averages
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2014
Previous research has shown that people exhibit a sample size bias when judging the average of a set of stimuli on a single dimension. The more stimuli there are in the set, the greater people judge the average to be. This effect has been demonstrated reliably for judgments of the average likelihood that groups of people will experience negative, positive, and neutral events and also for estimates of the mean of sets of numbers . The present research focuses on whether this effect is observed for judgments of average on a perceptual dimension. In 5 experiments we show that people's judgments of the average size of the squares in a set increase as the number of squares in the set increases. This effect occurs regardless of whether the squares in each set are presented simultaneously or sequentially; whether the squares in each set are different sizes or all the same size; and whether the response is a rating of size, an estimate of area, or a comparative judgment. These results are consistent with a priming account of the sample size bias, in which the sample size activates a representation of magnitude that directly biases the judgment of average.
How can observers use perceived size? Centroid versus mean-size judgments
Journal of Vision, 2019
statistical representations are aggregate properties of the environment that are presumed to be perceived automatically and preattentively. We investigated two tasks presumed to involve these representations: judgments of the centroid of a set of spatially arrayed items and judgments of the mean size of the items in the array. The question we ask is: When similar information is required for both tasks, do observers use it with equal postfilter efficiency (Sun, Chubb, Wright, & Sperling, 2016)? We find that, according to instructions, observers can either efficiently utilize item size in making centroid judgments or ignore it almost completely. Compared to centroid judgments, however, observers estimating mean size incorporate the size of individual items into the average with low efficiency.
Objects with reduced visibility still contribute to visual size averaging
People can rapidly judge the average size of a collection of objects with considerable accuracy. In this study, we tested whether this size-averaging process relies on relatively early object representations or on later object representations that have undergone iterative processing. We asked participants to judge the average size of a set of circles and, in some conditions, presented two additional circles that were either smaller or larger than the average. The additional circles were surrounded by four-dot masks that either lingered longer than the circle array, preventing further processing with object substitution masking (OSM), or disappeared simultaneously with the circle array, allowing the circle representation to reach later visual processing stages. Surprisingly, estimation of average circle size was modulated by both visible circles and circles whose visibility was impaired by OSM. There was also no correlation across participants between the influence of the masked circles and susceptibility to OSM. These findings suggest that relatively early representations of objects can contribute to the size-averaging process despite their reduced visibility.
Perceived group size is determined by the centroids of the component elements
Journal of Vision, 2021
To accomplish the deceptively simple task of perceiving the size of objects in the visual scene, the visual system combines information about the retinal size of the object with several other cues, including perceived distance, relative size, and prior knowledge. When local component elements are perceptually grouped to form objects, the task is further complicated because a grouped object does not have a continuous contour from which retinal size can be estimated. Here, we investigate how the visual system solves this problem and makes it possible for observers to judge the size of perceptually grouped objects. We systematically vary the shape and orientation of the component elements in a two-alternative forced-choice task and find that the perceived size of the array of component objects can be almost perfectly predicted from the distance between the centroids of the component elements and the center of the array. This is true whether the global contour forms a circle or a square. When elements were positioned such that the centroids along the global contour were at different distances from the center, perceived size was based on the average distance. These results indicate that perceived size does not depend on the size of individual elements, and that smooth contours formed by the outer edges of the component elements are not used to estimate size. The current study adds to a growing literature highlighting the importance of centroids in visual perception and may have implications for how size is estimated for ensembles of different objects.
Journal of vision, 2012
Retinal image size can be used to judge objects' distances because for any object one can assume that some sizes are more likely than others. It has been shown that an increased variability in the size of otherwise identical target objects over trials reduces the weight given to retinal image size as a distance cue. Here, we examined whether an increased variability in the size of objects of a different color, orientation, or shape reduces the weight given to retinal image size when judging distance. Subjects had to indicate the 3D position of a simulated target object. Retinal image size was given significantly less weight as a cue for judging the target cube's distance when differently colored and differently oriented target objects appeared in many simulated sizes but not when differently shaped objects had many simulated sizes. We also examined whether increasing the variability in the size of cubes in the surroundings reduces the weight given to retinal image size when judging distance. It does not. We conclude that variability in surrounding or dissimilar objects' sizes has a negligible influence on the extent to which people rely on retinal image size as a cue for judging distance.
An aftereffect of adaptation to mean size
Visual Cognition, 2012
The visual system rapidly represents the mean size of sets of objects (Ariely, 2001). Here, we investigated whether mean size is explicitly encoded by the visual system, along a single dimension like texture, numerosity, and other visual dimensions susceptible to adaptation. ...