The physical elevation that appears to correspond to eye level (VPEL), as measured with a small visual target, changes systematically with the orientation in depth (‘visual pitch’) of a visual field consisting of one or two pitched-from-vertical lines in darkness. The influence is large and, with a one-line stimulus, is only 15% smaller than the influence exerted by a complexly structured, well-illuminated, pitched visual field. A line from a frontoparallel plane can be presented to the same retinal locus as a pitched-from-vertical line; the three experiments in the present report were aimed at determining the influence on VPEL from such lines. In the first two experiments the subject viewed a visual field consisting of a one-line or two-line pitched-from-vertical stimulus from a pitched-only plane or an oblique one-line or two-line stimulus from an erect plane. Each of the pitched-from-vertical stimuli was presented at seven different orientations separated by 10° over a ±30° range. Each of the oblique-line stimuli was presented at an orientation that resulted in stimulation to the same retinal locus as one of the conditions with pitched-from-vertical lines, and thus a range of ‘equivalent pitches’ was examined that corresponded to the range of pitches for the pitched-from-vertical lines. The variation in orientation of the oblique-line stimulus and the pitched-from-vertical stimulus each produced systematic changes in VPEL; the two were indistinguishable. A third experiment specifically designed to examine the possibility that either stimulus sequencing or lack of naivity of the subjects might have been involved turned up no such effects. It is concluded that the aspect of a line stimulus that controls the influence on VPEL is the orientation of the image of the line on a projection sphere centered on the nodal point of the eye or, as in the present experiments with viewing in primary position, the retinal locus stimulated; the orientation-in-depth of the stimulating line provides no additional influence on VPEL for the stationary, erect, monocularly viewing observer. The results are interpreted within the framework of the great-circle model.
Can positions in the visual field with high attentional capabilities be good candidates for a new preferred retinal locus?
