Norman J Farley, Adkins Olivia C, Dowell Catherine J, Shain Lindsey M, Hoyng Stevie C, Kinnard Jonathan D
Department of Psychological Sciences, Ogden College of Science and Engineering, Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, Kentucky, 42101-2030, USA.
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 47405, USA.
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2017 May;79(4):1195-1203. doi: 10.3758/s13414-017-1294-9.
We conducted an experiment to evaluate the ability of 32 younger and older adults to visually perceive distances in an outdoor setting. On any given trial, the observers viewed 2 environmental distances and were required to estimate the distance ratio-the length of the (usually) larger distance relative to that of the shorter. The stimulus distance ratios ranged from 1.0 (the stimulus distances were identical) to 8.0 (1 distance interval was 8.0 times longer than the other). The stimulus distances were presented within a 26 m × 60 m portion of a grassy field. The observers were able to reliably estimate the stimulus distance ratios: The overall Pearson r correlation coefficient relating the judged and actual distance ratios was 0.762. Fifty-eight percent of the variance in the observers' perceived distance ratios could thus be accounted for by variations in the actual stimulus ratios. About half of the observers significantly underestimated the distance ratios, while the judgments of the remainder were essentially accurate. Significant modulatory effects of sex and age occurred, such that the male observers' judgments were the most precise, while those of the older males were the most accurate.
我们进行了一项实验，以评估32名年轻和年长成年人在户外环境中视觉感知距离的能力。在任何给定的试验中，观察者观看2个环境距离，并被要求估计距离比——（通常）较长距离相对于较短距离的长度。刺激距离比范围从1.0（刺激距离相同）到8.0（1个距离间隔比另一个长8.0倍）。刺激距离呈现在一片草地的26米×60米区域内。观察者能够可靠地估计刺激距离比：判断的和实际的距离比之间的总体皮尔逊r相关系数为0.762。因此，观察者感知距离比中58%的方差可以由实际刺激比的变化来解释。大约一半的观察者显著低估了距离比，而其余观察者的判断基本准确。性别和年龄产生了显著的调节作用，男性观察者的判断最精确，而年长男性的判断最准确。
