Jonathan Doyon

Perception of Stand-on-ability: Do Geographical Slants Feel Steeper Than They Look?

Past research has shown that haptically perceived surface slant by foot is matched with visually perceived slant by a factor of 0.81. Slopes perceived visually appear shallower than when stood on without looking. We sought to identify the sources of this discrepancy by asking participants to judge whether they would be able to stand on an inclined ramp. In the first experiment, visual perception was compared to pedal perception in which participants took half a step with one foot onto an occluded ramp. Visual perception closely matched the actual maximal slope angle that one could stand on, whereas pedal perception underestimated it. Participants may have been less stable in the pedal condition while taking half a step onto the ramp. We controlled for this by having participants hold onto a sturdy tripod in the pedal condition (Experiment 2). This did not eliminate the difference between visual and haptic perception, but repeating the task while sitting on a chair did (Experiment 3). Beyond balance requirements, pedal perception may also be constrained by the limited range of motion at the ankle and knee joints while standing. Indeed, when we restricted range of motion by wearing an ankle brace pedal perception underestimated the affordance (Experiment 4). Implications for ecological theory were offered by discussing the notion of functional equivalence and the role of exploration in perception.

Comparison of two psychophysical methods across visual and haptic perception of stand-on-ability

Recent research (Hajnal et al. in Perception 45(7):768–786, 2016) found apparent differences between haptic and visual perception of the affordance of stand-on-ability. One reason for this discrepancy might be the imprecision of the measurement method. We compared the psychophysical method of adjustment with a dynamic staircase method of stimulus presentation in an affordance task. Three groups of participants either visually inspected a flat sturdy sloped ramp, placed one foot onto the ramp occluded from view, or placed one foot on the ramp while allowed to look at it, in the visual, haptic, or multimodal condition, respectively. Each trial was presented by moving the ramp up or down until the participant perceived the action boundary, i.e., the steepest slope that still afforded upright stance. After perceptual trials, we measured the actual action boundaries by allowing participants to attempt to stand on the ramp. The action boundary was the average between the lowest false alarm and steepest hit within a 1.5° margin of difference. Visual perception was found to be equivalent with haptic perception. Perceptual and action boundaries were indistinguishable, but only when employing the more precise staircase method. The results support the postulate of equivalence among perceptual systems proposed by Gibson (The senses considered as perceptual systems. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1966), and the idea of correspondence between perception and action which is the cornerstone of affordance theory.

Fractality of body movements predicts perception of affordances: Evidence from stand-on-ability judgments about slopes.

We recorded head motion with one wireless marker attached to the back of the head during quiet stance as participants visually inspected a sloped ramp in order to perceive whether they might be able to stand on the surface. Participants responded with “yes” or “no” without attempting to stand on the ramp. As has been found in dynamic touch (Palatinus, Kelty-Stephen, Kinsella-Shaw, Carello, & Turvey, 2014), we hypothesized that multiscale fluctuation patterns in bodily movement during visual observation would predict perceptual judgments. Mixed-effects logistic regression predicted binary affordance judgments as a function of geographical slant angle, head-motion standard deviation, and multifractal spectrum width (Ihlen, 2012). Multifractal spectrum width was the strongest predictor of affordance judgments. Specifically, increased spectrum width predicted decreased odds of a “yes” answer. Interestingly, standard deviation was not a significant predictor, reinforcing our prediction that traditional measures of variability fail to account for what fractal measures of multiscale interactions can predict about information pickup in perception-action systems.