Calendar

May 22

Knowing (by) Designing 2013

May 27

13th Intl. Conf. on New Interfaces for Musical Expression

May 28

Graphics Interface 2013

May 21

“ Computer analyst to programmer: "You start coding. I'll go find out what they want." ”

-- Popular computer one-liner

Share this quote on...
Get more quotes via RSS or by joining our Usability Quote of the Day Facebook Page

Featured chapter

Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann

Read Steve's chapter !

Help us help you!

Spread the word:
Donate
Other ways to help

James S. Tittle

Add description

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Rename / change spelling

Add publication

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Publications by James S. Tittle (bibliography)

1988

Edit | Del

Tittle, James S., Rouse, Michael W. and Braunstein, Myron L. (1988): Relationship of Static Stereoscopic Depth Perception to Performance with Dynamic Stereoscopic Displays. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd Annual Meeting 1988. pp. 1439-1442.

“Although most tasks performed by human observers that require accurate stereoscopic depth perception, such as working with tools, operating machinery, and controlling vehicles, involve dynamically changing disparities, classification of observers as having normal or deficient stereoscopic vision is currently based on performance with static stereoscopic displays. The present study compares the performance of subjects classified as deficient in static stereoscopic vision to a control group with normal stereoscopic vision in two experiments -- one in which the disparities were constant during motion and one in which in the disparities changed continuously. In the first experiment, subjects judged orientation in depth of a dihedral angle, with the apex pointed toward or away from them. The angle translated horizontally, leaving the disparities constant. When disparity and motion parallax were placed in conflict, subjects in the normal group almost always responded in accordance with disparity, where as subjects in the deficient group responded in accordance with disparity at chance levels. In the second experiment, subjects were asked to judge the direction of rotation of a computer-generated cylinder. When dynamic occlusion and dynamic disparity indicated conflicting directions, performance of subjects in the normal and deficient groups did not differ significantly. When only dynamic disparity information was provided, most subjects classified as stereo deficient were able to judge the direction of rotation accurately. These results indicate that measures of stereoscopic vision do not include changing disparities may not provide a complete evaluation of the ability of a human observer to perceive depth on the basis of disparity.”

Add publication