2020
DOI: 10.1167/jov.20.9.7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Combining biological motion perception with optic flow analysis for self-motion in crowds

Abstract: Heading estimation from optic flow relies on the assumption that the visual world is rigid. This assumption is violated when one moves through a crowd of people, a common and socially important situation. The motion of people in the crowd contains cues to their translation in the form of the articulation of their limbs, known as biological motion. We investigated how translation and articulation of biological motion influence heading estimation from optic flow for self-motion in a crowd. Participants had to es… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
20
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

4
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
1
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As the nonrigid motion of the Intact walker disturbs optic flow necessary for estimating self-motion (Riddell & Lappe, 2017 ; Hülemeier & Lappe, 2020 ) it could be a potential source of uncertainty for flow parsing estimates. To investigate whether nonrigid motion of a walker affected flow parsing we first tested for differences between the Intact and the Cloud (i.e., a non-human stimulus without nonrigid motion) walkers and then for differences between the Intact and the Scrambled (i.e., a non-human stimulus with the same nonrigid motion as the Intact walker) walkers.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As the nonrigid motion of the Intact walker disturbs optic flow necessary for estimating self-motion (Riddell & Lappe, 2017 ; Hülemeier & Lappe, 2020 ) it could be a potential source of uncertainty for flow parsing estimates. To investigate whether nonrigid motion of a walker affected flow parsing we first tested for differences between the Intact and the Cloud (i.e., a non-human stimulus without nonrigid motion) walkers and then for differences between the Intact and the Scrambled (i.e., a non-human stimulus with the same nonrigid motion as the Intact walker) walkers.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Scrambled walkers served as a control for possible effects on flow parsing of the nonrigid motion produced by the walker. This was critical for our study because the presence of nonrigid motion of humans (and scrambled versions of human PLWs) affects optic flow perception (Riddell & Lappe, 2017 ; Koerfer & Lappe, 2020 ; Hülemeier & Lappe, 2020 ) and, therefore, might also affect flow parsing. For the Intact walker, we induced conflicts between biological features (i.e., facing and articulation) and the direction of scene-relative motion.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Due to the similar to identical motion speed of the observer and the walkers, the optic flow was reduced to a minimum. Here, participants must infer visual self-motion from the articulation of the walkers in the crowd ( Seno & Sato, 2012 ; Masselink & Lappe, 2015 ; Riddell & Lappe, 2017 ; Hülemeier & Lappe, 2020 ). In the approaching condition, participants visually traversed a crowd that walked toward them.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In natural environments, however, we are often confronted with dynamic scenes in which other people walk alongside us. The motion of other walking humans, known as biological motion ( Johansson, 1973 ), introduces noise to the optic flow field, thereby biasing optic flow analysis for heading, the direction of one's self-motion ( Riddell & Lappe, 2017 ; Riddell & Lappe, 2018 ; Riddell, Li, & Lappe, 2019 ; Hülemeier & Lappe, 2020 ; Koerfer & Lappe, 2020 ) and concerning flow parsing, the estimation of independent object motion within a flow field ( Mayer, Riddell, & Lappe, 2021 ). Biological motion consists of limb articulation and its associated translation through space.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In scenes that violate the assumption of rigidity, for example, if objects move in the scene, heading perception becomes biased by the independent object motion ( Warren & Saunders, 1995 ; Royden & Hildreth, 1996 ; Layton & Fajen, 2016 ; Li, Ni, Lappe, Niehorster, & Sun, 2018 ). A particularly relevant situation occurs when other people move in the scene, such as when a traveling observer encounters another walker or a group of walkers ( Riddell & Lappe, 2017 ; Riddell & Lappe, 2018 ; Riddell, Li, & Lappe, 2019 ; Hülemeier & Lappe, 2020 ; Koerfer & Lappe, 2020 ; Mayer, Riddell, & Lappe, 2021 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%