Arthur started following the work of April Ash, University of Wollongong, Psychology.
Arthur started following the work of Patricia DeLucia, Texas Tech University, Psychology.
Arthur started following the work of Tomas Knapen, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Brain and Cognitive Sciences.
Papers
Speed judgments of three-dimensional motion incorporate extra-retinal information
Co-Authored with Dr. Eli Brenner and Dr. Andrew Welchman
When tracking an object moving in depth, the visual system should take changes of eye vergence into account to judge the object's 3D speed correctly. Previous work has shown that extraretinal information about changes in eye vergence is exploited when judging the sign of 3D motion. Here, we ask whether extraretinal signals also affect judgments of 3D speed. Observers judged the speed of a small target surrounded by a large background. To manipulate extraretinal information, we varied the vergence demand of the entire stimulus sinusoidally over time. At different phases of vergence pursuit, we changed the disparity of the target relative to the background, leading observers to perceive approaching target motion. We determined psychometric functions for the target's approach speed when the eyes were (1) converging, (2) diverging, (3) maximally converged (near), and (4) maximally diverged (far). The target's motion was reported as faster during convergence and slower during divergence but perceived speed was little affected at near or far vergence positions. Thus, 3D speed judgments are affected by extraretinal signals about changes in eye rotation but appear unaffected by the absolute orientation of the eyes. We develop a model that accounts for observers' judgments by taking a weighted average of the retinal and extraretinal signals to target motion.
Evaluating methods to measure time-to-contact
Co-Authored with Dr. Andrew Welchman
Many every-day activities necessitate an estimate of the time remaining until an object will hit us: the time-to-contact (TTC). Observers’ skill in estimating TTC has been studied by considering the use and combination of key visual signals (e.g. looming and disparity). However, establishing observers’ proficiency in estimating TTC can be complicated, as the variable of interest (time) is typically highly correlated with other signals (e.g. target velocity or displacement). As a result, observers’ responses may be based on correlates of TTC rather than on TTC itself. Here we evaluate two widely-used TTC tasks: one absolute task in which observers pressed a button to indicate the estimated TTC, and a relative task in which TTC was judged relative to a reference. We test how a wide range of experimental variables that co-vary with TTC contribute to observers’ judgments. We systematically vary the correlation between TTC and its covariates and test how psychophysical judgments are affected. We show that for both absolute and relative estimation tasks, observers’ responses are best explained on the basis that they judge TTC rather than one (or more) of its covariates. Our results suggest that relative tasks are preferable when assessing TTC, and we suggest a number of analyses methods to ensure that participants’ judgements correspond to the variable under investigation.