Heading judgments in minimal environments: The value of a heuristic when invariants are rare

Abstract

Observers made systematic heading judgments in two experiments simulating their translation through an environment with only two trees. When those trees converged or decelerated apart, observers tended to follow the invariant information and make heading judgments outside the near member of the pair. When those trees accelerated apart, however, observers tended to follow the heuristic information and make judgments outside the far member, although this result was tempered by the angular separation between the trees and their relative acceleration. The simultaneous existence and use of invariants and heuristics are discussed in terms of different metatheoretical approaches to perception, As pedestrians, how do we avoid obstacles? How do we know where we are going? Since the work of Gibson (1950Gibson ( , 1979, much research has focused on answering these questions and on understanding the ability often called wayfinding. One ofthe several subtasks ofwayfinding is to determine one's heading, or instantaneous direction of movement. Many schemes have been proposed for how we solve this task (see Cutting, 1986, for reviews). Here, we parse contemporary computational approaches into those focusing on fields and those focusing on objects (e.g. Tanaka, 1998).

Evidence for a generic interceptive strategy

“…The findings with humans catching Frisbees further support the generality of viewer-based navigational strategies and control heuristics (Cutting, Springer, Braren, & Johnson, 1992;Cutting & Wang, 2000;Shaffer et al, 2004;Royden & Hildreth, 1996). Behavior consistent with maintaining spatiotemporal constancy between a pursuer and a moving target is found in many domains.…”

Seeking one’s heading through eye movements

“…Here, any heading response to the outside of the far object would follow a heuristic (Gilden & Proffitt, 1989;Kahneman, Slovic, & Tversky, 1982)-a reasonable, but unsure, bet about where one's heading might lie. Cutting and Wang (2000) analyze this situation further, but their results are beyond the scope of what is discussed here.…”

Estimating the relative weights of visual and auditory tau versus heuristic-based cues for time-to-contact judgments in realistic, familiar scenes by older and younger adults

“…This Bsize-arrival effect^was reported not only in experiments using laboratory-type stimuli (e.g., a disc increasing in size presented on a blank background), but also in more naturalistic traffic-related settings (Caird & Hancock, 1994;Horswill, Helman, Ardiles, & Wann, 2005;Petzoldt, 2014;Schleinitz, Petzoldt, Krems, & Gehlert, 2016). Relative size may be considered a heuristic that does not reliably provide accurate TTC information (Braunstein, 1976;Cutting & Wang, 2000;DeLucia, 2004;Hosking & Crassini, 2011). It does not guarantee the correct solution or define a single event in 3-D space.…”