Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Perceiving distance accurately by a directional process of integrating ground information

Nature volume 428, pages 73–77 (2004)Cite this article

Abstract

By itself, the absolute distance of an object cannot be accurately judged beyond 2–3 m (refs 1–3). Yet, when it is viewed with reference to a flat terrain, humans accurately judge the absolute distance of the object up to 20 m, an ability that is important for various actions4,5,6,7,8. Here we provide evidence that this is accomplished by integrating local patches of ground information into a global surface reference frame. We first show that restricting an observer's visual field of view to the local ground area around the target leads to distance underestimation, indicating that a relatively wide expanse of the ground surface is required for accurate distance judgement. Second, as proof of surface integration, we show that even with the restricted view, the observer can accurately judge absolute distance by scanning local patches of the ground surface, bit by bit, from near to far, but not in the reverse direction. This finding also reveals that the surface integration process uses the near-ground-surface information as a foundation for surface representation, and extrapolation to the far ground surface around the target for accurate absolute distance computation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: The effect of visual field size on judged distance.
Figure 2: Profile illustrations of the physical and perceived ground surface through a limited field of view.
Figure 3: The critical ground surface for accurate distance judgement.
Figure 4: Scanning direction affects judged absolute distance.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gogel, W. C. & Tietz, J. D. A comparison of oculomotor and motion parallax cues of egocentric distance. Vision Res. 19, 1161–1170 (1979)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Philbeck, J. W. & Loomis, J. M. Comparison of two indicators of perceived egocentric distance under full-cue and reduced-cue conditions. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 23, 72–85 (1997)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ooi, T. L., Wu, B. & He, Z. J. Distance determined by the angular declination below the horizon. Nature 414, 197–200 (2001)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Thomson, J. A. Is continuous visual monitoring necessary in visually guided locomotion? J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 9, 427–443 (1983)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Rieser, J. J., Ashmead, D., Talor, C. & Youngquist, G. Visual perception and the guidance of locomotion without vision to previously seen targets. Perception 19, 675–689 (1990)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Loomis, J., DaSilva, J., Fujita, N. & Fukusima, S. Visual space perception and visually directed action. J. Exp. Psychol. 18, 906–921 (1992)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Loomis, J., DaSilva, J., Philbeck, J. W. & Fukusima, S. Visual perception of location and distance. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 5, 72–77 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sinai, M. J., Ooi, T. L. & He, Z. J. Terrain influences the accurate judgement of distance. Nature 395, 497–500 (1998)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Loomis, J. M. & Knapp, J. M. in Virtual and Adaptive Environments (eds Hettinger, L. J. & Hass, M. W.) 21–46 (Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hagen, M. A., Jones, R. K. & Reed, E. S. On a neglected variable in theories of pictorial perception: Truncation of the visual field. Percept. Psychophys. 23, 326–330 (1978)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Dolezal, H. Living in a World Transformed: Perceptual and Performatory Adaptation to Visual Distortion (Academic, New York, 1982)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Loomis, J. M. & Philbeck, J. W. Is the anisotropy of perceived 3-D shape invariant across scale? Percept. Psychophys. 61, 397–402 (1999)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Loomis, J. M., Philbeck, J. W. & Zahorik, P. Dissociation of location and shape in visual space. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 28, 1202–1212 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gibson, J. J. The Perception of the Visual World (Houghton, Mifflin, Boston, Massachusetts, 1950)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gibson, J. J. The perception of visual surfaces. Am. J. Psychol. 63, 367–384 (1950)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Freeman, R. B. Jr Effect of size on visual slant. Psychol. Rev. 72, 501–504 (1956)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Braunstein, M. L. Motion and texture as sources of slant information. J. Exp. Psychol. 78, 247–253 (1968)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gibson, J. J. & Cornsweet, J. The perceived slant of visual surfaces—optical and geographical. J. Exp. Psychol. 44, 11–15 (1952)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sedgwick, H. A. in Handbook of Perception and Human Performance (eds Boff, K. R., Kaufman, L. & Thomas, J. P.) 21.1–21.57 (Willey, New York, 1986)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Meng, J. C. & Sedgwick, H. A. Distance perception mediated through nested contact relations among surface. Percept. Psychophys. 63, 1–15 (2001)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Land, M. F. Scanning eye movements in a heteropod mollusc. J. Exp. Biol. 96, 427–430 (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Land, M. F. Motion and vision: why animals move their eyes. J. Comp. Physiol. A 185, 341–352 (1999)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported in part by a grant from NIH to Z.J.H. and T.L.O. and by a RIG grant from the University of Louisville to Z.J.H.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, 40292, USA

    Bing Wu & Zijiang J. He

  2. Department of Basic Sciences, Pennsylvania College of Optometry, 8360 Old York Road, Elkins Park, Pennsylvania, 19027, USA

    Teng Leng Ooi

Authors
  1. Bing Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Teng Leng Ooi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zijiang J. He
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Teng Leng Ooi or Zijiang J. He.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wu, B., Ooi, T. & He, Z. Perceiving distance accurately by a directional process of integrating ground information. Nature 428, 73–77 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02350

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02350

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing