September 2011
Volume 11, Issue 11
Free
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2011
Efficiencies for the statistics of size
Author Affiliations
  • Joshua Solomon
    Optometry and Visual Science, City University London, UK
  • Michael Morgan
    Optometry and Visual Science, City University London, UK
  • Charles Chubb
    Social Sciences, University of California, Irvine, USA
Journal of Vision September 2011, Vol.11, 1041. doi:10.1167/11.11.1041
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Joshua Solomon, Michael Morgan, Charles Chubb; Efficiencies for the statistics of size. Journal of Vision 2011;11(11):1041. doi: 10.1167/11.11.1041.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Different laboratories have achieved a consensus regarding how well human observers can estimate the average orientation in a set of N objects. Such estimates are not only limited by visual noise, which perturbs each object's apparent orientation, they are also inefficient: Observers effectively use only √N objects in their estimates (e.g. Dakin, JOSA A, 2001; Solomon, JoV in press). More controversial is the efficiency with which observers can estimate the average size in an array of circles (e.g. Ariely, Psych. Sci., 2001; Chong et al., P&P, 2008; Myczek & Simons, P&P, 2008). Of course, there are some important differences between orientation and size, nonetheless it seemed sensible to compare the two types of estimate against the same ideal observer. Indeed, quantitative evaluation of statistical efficiency requires this sort of comparison (Fisher, 1925).

Our first step was to measure the noise that limits size estimates when only two circles are compared. Our results (Solomon & Chubb, AVA Christmas, 2009) were consistent with the visual system adding the same amount of Gaussian noise to all logarithmically transduced circle diameters. Imitating and amplifying this visual noise in (uncrowded) 8-circle arrays, we have now measured its effect on discrimination between mean sizes. At present, we have results from 4 observers. Inferred efficiencies range from 37.5% to 87.5%. More consistent are our measurements of just-noticeable differences in size variance. These latter results suggest close to 100% efficiency for variance discriminations. That is, like the ideal, human observers effectively use all 8 circles in their estimates of size variance. Estimates of mean size are less efficient, but our data suggest that these estimates are limited by the same noise that limits estimates of size variance. That's where the analogy between size and orientation breaks down. For orientation, mean estimates are noisier than variance estimates (Solomon, JoV in press).

EPSRC grant EP/H033955. 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×