Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/11375/13536
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | Sun, Hong-Jin | en_US |
dc.contributor.advisor | Bruce Milliken, Sue Becker | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Comishen, Michael A. | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2014-06-18T17:04:20Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2014-06-18T17:04:20Z | - |
dc.date.created | 2013-09-27 | en_US |
dc.date.issued | 2013-10 | en_US |
dc.identifier.other | opendissertations/8372 | en_US |
dc.identifier.other | 9468 | en_US |
dc.identifier.other | 4640438 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11375/13536 | - |
dc.description.abstract | <p>When an observer detects changes in a scene from a viewpoint that is different from the learned viewpoint, viewpoint change caused by observer’s locomotion would lead to better recognition performance compared to a situation where the viewpoint change is caused by equivalent movement of the scene. While such benefit of observer locomotion could be caused by spatial updating through body-based information (Simons and Wang 1998), or knowledge of change of reference direction gained through locomotion (Mou et al, 2009). The effect of such reference direction information have been demonstrated through the effect of a visual cue (e.g., a chopstick) presented during the testing phase indicating the original learning viewpoint (Mou et al, 2009).</p> <p>In the current study, we re-examined the mechanisms of such benefit of observer locomotion. Six experiments were performed using a similar change detection paradigm. Experiment 1 & 2 adopted the design as that in Mou et al. (2009). The results were inconsistent with the results from Mou et al (2009) in that even with the visual indicator, the performance (accuracy and response time) in the table rotation condition was still significantly worse than that in the observer locomotion condition. In Experiments 3-5, we compared performance in the normal walking condition with conditions where the body-based information may not be reliable (disorientation or walking over a long path). The results again showed a lack of benefit with the visual indicator. Experiment 6 introduced a more salient and intrinsic reference direction: coherent object orientations. Unlike the previous experiments, performance in the scene rotation condition was similar to that in the observer locomotion condition.</p> <p>Overall we showed that the body-based information in observer locomotion may be the most prominent information. The knowledge of the reference direction could be useful but might only be effective in limited scenarios such as a scene with a dominant orientation.</p> | en_US |
dc.subject | change detection | en_US |
dc.subject | proprioception | en_US |
dc.subject | scene recognition | en_US |
dc.subject | spatial reference direction | en_US |
dc.subject | spatial updating | en_US |
dc.subject | viewer locomotion | en_US |
dc.subject | viewpoint change | en_US |
dc.subject | Cognitive Psychology | en_US |
dc.subject | Cognitive Psychology | en_US |
dc.title | CHANGE DETECTION OF A SCENE FOLLOWING A VIEWPOINT CHANGE: MECHANISMS FOR THE REDUCED PERFORMANCE COST WHEN THE VIEWPOINT CHANGE IS CAUSED BY VIEWER LOCOMOTION | en_US |
dc.type | thesis | en_US |
dc.contributor.department | Psychology | en_US |
dc.description.degree | Master of Science (MSc) | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | Open Access Dissertations and Theses |
Files in This Item:
File | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|
fulltext.pdf | 1.27 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.