Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35315875›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2022

Stereoscopic depth constancy for physical objects and their virtual counterparts.

Brittney Hartle, Laurie M Wilcox

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Brittney HartleDepartment of Psychology and Centre for Vision Research, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Laurie M WilcoxDepartment of Psychology and Centre for Vision Research, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
York University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stereopsis plays an important role in depth perception; if so, disparity-defined depth should not vary with distance. However, studies of stereoscopic depth constancy often report systematic distortions in depth judgments over distance, particularly for virtual stimuli. Our aim was to understand how depth estimation is impacted by viewing distance and display-based cue conflicts by replicating physical objects in virtual counterparts. To this end, we measured perceived depth using virtual textured half-cylinders and identical three-dimensional (3D) printed versions at two viewing distances under monocular and binocular conditions. Virtual stimuli were viewed using a mirror stereoscope and an Oculus Rift head-mounted display (HMD), while physical stimuli were viewed in a controlled test environment. Depth judgments were similar in both virtual apparatuses, which suggests that variations in the viewing geometry and optics of the HMD have little impact on perceived depth. When viewing physical stimuli binocularly, judgments were accurate and exhibited stereoscopic depth constancy. However, in all cases, depth was underestimated for virtual stimuli and failed to achieve depth constancy. It is clear that depth constancy is only complete for cue-rich physical stimuli and that the failure of constancy in virtual stimuli is due to the presence of the vergence-accommodation conflict. Further, our post hoc analysis revealed that prior experience with virtual and physical environments had a strong effect on depth judgments. That is, performance in virtual environments was enhanced by limited exposure to a related task using physical objects.

Indexed as

Depth PerceptionVision DisparityAccommodation, OcularHumansJudgmentMathematics

Identifiers

PMID35315875
PMCPMC8944385
OpenAlexW4221072288

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.