Ordinal judgements of depth in monocularly- and binocularly-viewed photographs of complex natural scenes

This study investigated the contribution of stereoscopic depth cues to the reliability of ordinal depth judgments in complex natural scenes. Participants viewed photographs of cluttered natural scenes, either monocularly or stereoscopically. On each trial, they judged which of two indicated points in the scene was closer in depth. We assessed the reliability of these judgments over repeated trials, and how well they correlated with the actual disparities of the points between the left and right eyes' views. The reliability of judgments increased as their depth separation increased, was higher when the points were on separate objects, and deteriorated for point pairs that were more widely separated in the image plane. Stereoscopic viewing improved sensitivity to depth for points on the same surface, but not for points on separate objects. Stereoscopic viewing thus provides depth information that is complementary to that available from monocular occlusion cues.

Disparity-defined objects moving in depth do not elicit three-dimensional shape constancy

Observers generally fail to recover three-dimensional shape accurately from binocular disparity. Typically, depth is overestimated at near distances and underestimated at far distances [Johnston, E. B. (1991). Systematic distortions of shape from stereopsis. Vision Research, 31, 1351–1360]. A simple prediction from this is that disparity-defined objects should appear to expand in depth when moving towards the observer, and compress in depth when moving away. However, additional information is provided when an object moves from which 3D Euclidean shape can be recovered, be this through the addition of structure from motion information [Richards, W. (1985). Structure from stereo and motion. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 2, 343–349], or the use of non-generic strategies [Todd, J. T., & Norman, J. F. (2003). The visual perception of 3-D shape from multiple cues: Are observers capable of perceiving metric structure? Perception and Psychophysics, 65, 31–47]. Here, we investigated shape constancy for objects moving in depth. We found that to be perceived as constant in shape, objects needed to contract in depth when moving toward the observer, and expand in depth when moving away, countering the effects of incorrect distance scaling (Johnston, 1991). This is a striking example of the failure of shape con- stancy, but one that is predicted if observers neither accurately estimate object distance in order to recover Euclidean shape, nor are able to base their responses on a simpler processing strategy.