July 2013
Volume 13, Issue 9
Free
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2013
Visual Guidance When Army Crawling Under Barriers
Author Affiliations
  • Shaziela Ishak
    Psychology, Ramapo College of New Jersey
  • Adam Assoian
    Psychology, Ramapo College of New Jersey
  • Joseph Lehan
    Psychology, Ramapo College of New Jersey
Journal of Vision July 2013, Vol.13, 477. doi:10.1167/13.9.477
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to Subscribers Only
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Shaziela Ishak, Adam Assoian, Joseph Lehan; Visual Guidance When Army Crawling Under Barriers. Journal of Vision 2013;13(9):477. doi: 10.1167/13.9.477.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Despite its everyday relevance, few studies have examined how our visual perception is affected when objects are attached to the body. Successfully fitting through openings with objects involves visual guidance of movement. For adaptive motor control, we must recognize prospectively that actions such as wearing a bulky coat, holding a computer, or moving furniture changes which openings we can fit through. Inaccurate decisions can lead to injury or property damage. We assessed adults’ perception of affordances for army crawling (stomach touching the ground) in a person-plus-object system. Participants were presented with randomly ordered overhead barriers of different heights (10 to 70cm). Barriers were 15, 20, 25, 30, or 35cm larger than participant’s sagittal body width. For each trial participants army crawled under a barrier then, choose a backpack (10, 15, 20, 25, or 30cm thick) to wear, and finally crawled back under the barrier wearing the backpack. Participants were asked to pick the largest backpack they thought they could wear to army crawl without touching barriers. Videos revealed that participants rarely looked at barriers as they crawled under them without backpacks. Nonetheless, participants found another source of visual information. Almost every participant looked back and forth between backpacks and barriers for every trial when choosing a backpack. Participants reported combining proprioceptive and visual information about backpack and barrier heights in their decisions. Most adults displayed conservative response criteria: picking backpacks a level smaller than the barrier. For the +25-cm barrier 50% choose the15-cm bag but for +30-cm barrier 50% choose the 20-cm bag. This pattern led 42% of participants to refuse backpacks for the smallest barriers. Participants did not always leave of safety margin, 83% of participants hit different barriers at least once. Findings are discussed in terms of combining visual and proprioceptive information to make adaptive decisions.

Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2013

×
×

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.

×