Abstract

Over the last 70 years, there have been numerous studies undertaken in an attempt to explain slant perception and underestimation. Research has shown that the optical slant is being viewed at a lesser value than that of the geographical slant counterpart. In other words, there is a lack of correspondence between what is being perceived and what is actually being presented. In order to understand the problem fully a number of terms need to be explained, such as optical vs geographical slant. The optical slant is the slanted surface that is perceived by an individual, whereas the geographical slant is the physical slanted surface within a real environment. For example, the geographical slant for this paper is approximately 45°, if it is being held in a normal reading position, whereas the optical slant is 0° to the reader (based on an example in Gibson, 1950a). This phenomenon of slant underestimation has been shown repeatedly throughout the literature, a summary of which will be presented here. One of the more important findings is that as the geographical angle increases so too does the level of underestimation, as illustrated in Perrone (1981). This paper outlines an experimental design for testing slant perception estimations in the real world and computer generated environments.

Download the article (pdf)