Frank H. Durgin

Publications (Download CV)

Durgin, F. H., Love, A., Taylor, G., & Huk, A. C. (2026). Density is a precursor in the perception of visual numerosity: Evidence from adaptation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0001434 open access

Durgin, F. H., Suero Gonzalez, N., Wen, P., & Huk, A. C. (2026). Texture density discrimination is more precise than numerosity discrimination. Journal of Vision, 26, 2. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.26.2.2 open access

Becker, K., Dellinger, E., & Durgin, F. H. (2025). Change blindness, subset segmentation, and the perceptual underestimation of subset numerosity. Cognition, 262,106168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106168

Dorji, T., & Durgin, F. H. (2025). Figurative language is (implicitly) more dynamic and emotionally deeper than literal language. Language and Cognition, 17, e56. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2025.10010 open access

Durgin, F. H. (2025). Refreshing the conversation about adaptation and perceived numerosity: A reply to Yousif, Clarke and Brannon. Cognition, 254, 105883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105883

Durgin, F. H., Kwok, C. S., Becker, K. M., & Phyu, Y. M. (2025). Large bias in matching small horizontal and vertical extents separated in depth in the real world is similar for upright and supine observers. Vision, 9(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/vision9010011 open access

Mahajan, D., & Durgin, F. H. (2025). A conceptual replication of an implicit test of grammatical gender effects on inanimate concepts. Language and Cognition, 17, e28. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2024.76 open access

Dellinger, E. G., Becker, K. M., & Durgin, F. H. (2024). Implied occlusion and subset underestimation contribute to the weak-outnumber-strong numerosity illusion. Journal of Vision, 24, 14. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.11.14 open access

Durgin, F. H, & Martinez, Z. (2024). Relative numerosity is constructed from size and density information: Evidence from adaptation. Journal of Vision, 4(7), 4. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.7.4 open access

Tardeh, P. U. D, Xu, C., & Durgin, F. H. (2024). Default reference frames for angular expansion in the perception of visual direction. Vision, 8(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/vision8010007 open access

Zhu, T., Chen, P., & Durgin, F. H. (2024). The ups and downs of black and white: Do sensorimotor metaphors reflect an evolved perceptual interface? Metaphor and Symbol, 39(3), 169-182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2024.2309977

Durgin, F. H., & Portley, M. (2023). Is the approximate number system capacity limited? Extended display duration does not increase the limits of linear number estimation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 49(4), 483-495. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0001106

Hajnal, A., & Durgin, F. H. (2023). How frequent is the spontaneous occurrence of synchronized walking in daily life? Experimental Brain Research, 241, 469-478, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-022-06536-y

Billups, S., Thelamour, B., Thibodeau, P., & Durgin, F. H. (2022). On intersectionality: Visualizing the invisibility of Black women. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 7:100. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-022-00450-1 open access

Durgin, F. H., Aubry, E., Balisanyuka-Smith, J. J., & Yavuz, Ç. (2022). Spatial number estimation has a higher linear range than temporal number estimation; differential affordances for subdivision might help to explain why. Journal of Vision, 22(11), 15, https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.22.11.15 open access

Yan, C., Chen, Y., Zhang, Y., Kong, L., Durgin, F. H., & Li, Z. (2022). Perceptual scale expansion: A natural design for improving the precision of motor control. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218221115075

Portley, M., & Durgin, F. H. (2019). The second number-estimation elbow: Are visual numbers greater than 20 evaluated differently? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81, 1512-1521. doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01804-6 PDF

Durgin, F. H., & Keezing, U. I. (2018). Differential angular expansion in perceived direction in azimuth and elevation are yoked to the presence of a perceived ground plane. Vision, 2, 17, doi:10.3390/vision2020017. open access

Keezing, U. I., & Durgin, F. H. (2018). Do explicit estimates of angular declination become ungrounded in the presence of a ground plane?. i-Perception, 9(5), 1-22, https://doi.org/10.1177/2041669518808536. open access

Li, Z., & Durgin, F. H. (2018). Does perceived angular declination contribute to perceived optical slant on level ground? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80, 1609-1618. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-1536-5

Thibodeau, P. T., Sikos, L., & Durgin, F. H. (2018). Are subjective ratings of metaphors a red herring? The Big Two dimensions of metaphoric sentences. Behavioral Research Methods, 50, 759-772. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0903-9

Durgin, F. H., & Gelpi, R. (2017). When do vehicles of similes become figurative? Gaze patterns show that similes and metaphors are initially processed differently. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 1967-1972. PDF

Durgin, F. H., & Li, Z. (2017). Why do hills look so steep? In A. Shapiro and D. Todorovic (eds.) Oxford Compendium of Visual Illusions. Oxford University Press. PDF

Durgin, F. H. (2017). Counterpoint: Distinguishing between perception and judgment of spatial layout. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 344-346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616677829 PDF

Li, Z., & Durgin, F. H. (2017). A large-scale horizontal-vertical illusion produced with small objects separated in depth. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43, 1473-1479, https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000426 PDF

Dean, A. M., Oh, J., Thomson, C., Norris, C. J., & Durgin, F. H. (2016). Do individual differences and aging effects in the estimation of geographical slant reflect cognitive or perceptual effects? i-Perception, 7(4), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041669516658665 open access

Klein, B. J., Li, Z., & Durgin, F. H. (2016). Large perceptual distortions of locomotor action space occur in ground based coordinates: Angular expansion and the large scale horizontal-vertical illusion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42, 581-593. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000173 PDF

Li, Z., & Durgin, F. H. (2016). Perceived azimuth direction is exaggerated: Converging evidence from explicit and implicit measures. Journal of Vision, 16(1):4, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1167/16.1.4 open access

Shaffer, D. M., McManama, E., & Durgin, F. H. (2015). Manual anchoring biases in slant estimation affect matches even for near surfaces. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1665-1670. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0770-7 PDF

Williams, M. J. C., & Durgin, F. H. (2015). Direct manipulation of perceived angular declination affects perceived size and distance: A replication and extension of Wallach and O'Leary (1982). Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77, 1371-1378. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-0864-y open access

Coleman, A., & Durgin, F. H. (2014). Egocentric reference frame bias in the palmar haptic perception of surface orientation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 955-960. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0552-7 PDF

Durgin, F. H. (2014). Angular scale expansion theory and the misperception of egocentric distance in locomotor space. Psychology & Neuroscience, 7, 253-260. https://doi.org/10.3922/j.psns.2014.032 PDF open access

Shaffer, D. M., McManama, E., Swank, C., Williams, M., & Durgin, F. H. (2014). Anchoring in action: Manual estimates of slant are powerfully biased toward initial hand orientation and are correlated with verbal report. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40, 1203-1212. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036217 PDF

Durgin, F. H. (2013). What do hands know about hills? Interpreting Taylor-Covill and Eves (2013) in context. Acta Psychologica, 144, 451-458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.07.014 open access

Li, Z. & Durgin, F. H. (2013). Depth compression based on mis-scaling of binocular disparity may contribute to angular expansion in perceived optical slant. Journal of Vision, 13(12):3, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1167/13.12.3 open access

Li, Z., Sun, E., Strawser, C. J., Spiegel, A., Klein, B., & Durgin, F. H. (2013). On the anisotropy of perceived ground extents and the interpretation of walked distance as a measure of perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 477-493. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029405 PDF

Shaffer, D. M., McManama, E., Swank, C., & Durgin, F. H. (2013). Sugar and space? Not the case: Effects of low blood glucose on slant estimation are mediated by beliefs. i-Perception, 4, 147-155. https://doi.org/10.1068/i0592 open access

Stigliani, A., Li, Z., & Durgin, F. H. (2013). Humans have precise knowledge of familiar geographical slants. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1966-1973. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033865 PDF

Thibodeau, P., Peebles, M. M., Grodner, D. J., & Durgin, F. H. (2013). The wished-for always wins until the winner was inevitable all along: Motivated reasoning and belief bias regulate emotion during elections. Political Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12100

Chettih, S., Durgin, F. H., & Grodner, D. (2012). Mixing metaphors in the cerebral hemispheres: What happens when careers collide? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 38, 295-311. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025862 PDF

Durgin, F. H., Klein, B., Spiegel, A., Strawser, C. J., & Williams, M. (2012). The social psychology of perception experiments: Hills, backpacks, glucose and the problem of generalizability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1582-1595. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027805 PDF public access

Durgin, F. H., Leonard-Solis, K., Masters, O., Schmelz, B., & Li, Z. (2012). Expert performance by athletes in the verbal estimation of spatial extents does not alter their perceptual metric of space. i-Perception, 3(5), 357-367. https://doi.org/10.1068/i0498 open access

Durgin, F. H., & Li, Z. (2012). Spatial biases and the haptic experience of surface orientation. In A. El Saddik (ed.), Haptics Rendering and Applications (pp. 75-94), Intech. open access

Li, Z., & Durgin, F. H. (2012). A comparison of two theories of perceived distance on the ground plane: The angular expansion hypothesis and the intrinsic bias hypothesis. i-Perception, 3, 368-383. https://doi.org/10.1068/i0505 open access

Li, Z., & Durgin, F. H. (2012). Manual matching of perceived surface orientation is affected by arm posture: Evidence of calibration between proprioception and visual experience in near space. Experimental Brain Research, 216, 299-309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-011-2934-2 PDF public access

Durgin, F. H., DeWald, D., Lechich, S., Li, Z., & Ontiveros, Z. (2011). Action and motivation: Measuring perception or strategies? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 1077-1082. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0164-z PDF public access

Durgin, F. H. Hajnal, A., Li, Z., Tonge, N., & Stigliani, A. (2011). An imputed dissociation might be an artifact: Further evidence for the generalizability of the observations of Durgin et al. 2010. Acta Psychologica, 138, 281-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.09.002 PDF

Durgin, F. H., & Li, Z. (2011). The perception of 2D orientation is categorically biased. Journal of Vision, 11(8):13, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1167/11.8.13 open access

Durgin, F. H., & Li, Z. (2011). Perceptual scale expansion: An efficient angular coding strategy for locomotor space. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 73, 1856-1870. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-011-0143-5 PDF public access

Hajnal, A., Abdul-Malak, D. T., & Durgin, F. H. (2011). The perceptual experience of slope by foot and by finger. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 709-719. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019950 PDF

Li, Z., & Durgin, F. H. (2011). Design, data and theory regarding a digital hand inclinometer: A portable device for studying slant perception. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 363-371. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-010-0047-7 PDF public access

Li, Z., Phillips, J., & Durgin, F. H. (2011). The underestimation of egocentric distance: Evidence from frontal matching tasks. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 73, 2205-2217. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-011-0170-2 PDF public access

Saunders, J. A. & Durgin, F. H. (2011). Adaptation to conflicting visual and physical heading directions during walking. Journal of Vision, 11(3):15, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1167/11.3.15 open access

Thibodeau, P. H., & Durgin, F. H. (2011). Metaphor aptness and conventionality: A processing fluency account. Metaphor and Symbol, 26, 206-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2011.583196 PDF

Durgin, F. H. Hajnal, A., Li, Z., Tonge, N., & Stigliani, A. (2010). Palm boards are not action measures: An alternative to the two-systems theory of geographical slant perception. Acta Psychologica, 134, 182-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.01.009 PDF

Durgin, F. H., Li, Z., & Hajnal, A. (2010). Slant perception in near space is categorically biased: Evidence for a vertical tendency. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 72, 1875-1889. https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.7.1875 PDF

Durgin, F. H., & Li, Z. (2010). Controlled interaction: Strategies for using virtual reality to study perception. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 414-420. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.2.414 PDF

Li, Z. & Durgin, F. H. (2010). Perceived slant of binocularly viewed large-scale surfaces: A common model from explicit and implicit measures. Journal of Vision, 10(14):13, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1167/10.14.13 open access

Durgin, F. H. (2009). When walking makes perception better. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 43-47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01603.x PDF

Durgin, F. H., Baird, J. A., Greenburg, M., Russell, R., Shaughnessy, K., & Waymouth, S. (2009). Who is being deceived? The experimental demands of wearing a backpack. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 964-969. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.5.964 PDF

Grodner, D., Pietsch, C., & Durgin, F. H. (2009). The use of categorical features in adult spatial reorientation. Proceedings of the 2009 Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp 280-285). Amsterdam: The Netherlands. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5493p5tt PDF

Li, Z., & Durgin, F. H. (2009). Downhill slopes look shallower from the edge. Journal of Vision, 9(11):6, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1167/9.11.6 open access

Durgin, F. H., Akagi, M., Gallistel, C. R., & Haiken, W. (2008). The precision of locomotor odometry in humans. Experimental Brain Research, 193, 429-436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-008-1640-1. PDF

Durgin, F. H. (2008). Texture density adaptation and visual number revisited. Current Biology, 18, R855-R856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2008.07.053

Durgin, F. H., Doyle, E., & Egan, L. (2008). Upper-left gaze bias reveals competing search strategies in a reverse Stroop task. Acta Psychologica, 127, 428-448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2007.08.007 PDF

Thibodeau, P., & Durgin, F. H. (2008). Productive figurative communication: Conventional metaphors facilitate the comprehension of related novel metaphors. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 521-540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.05.001 PDF

Durgin, F. H., & Gigone, K. (2007). Enhanced optic flow speed discrimination while walking: Multisensory tuning of visual coding. Perception, 36,, 1465-1475. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5845 PDF

Durgin, F. H., Evans, L., Dunphy, N., Klostermann, S. & Simmons, K. (2007). Rubber hands feel the touch of light. Psychological Science, 18, 152-157. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01865.x PDF

Durgin, F. H., Reed, C., & Tigue, C. (2007). Step frequency and perceived self-motion. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception, 4(1): 5 , 1:23. https://doi.org/10.1145/1227134.1227139 PDF

Durgin, F. H., Fox, L. F., Schaffer, E., & Whitaker, R. (2005). The perception of linear self-motion. In B. E. Rogowitz, T. N. Pappas, S. J. Daly (Eds.) Human Vision and Electronic Imaging X, proceedings of SPIE-IS&T Electronic Imaging, SPIE Vol 5666, (pp. 503-514). https://doi.org/10.1117/12.610864 PDF

Durgin, F. H., Gigone, K., & Scott, R. (2005). The perception of visual speed while moving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 339-353. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.31.2.339 PDF

Durgin, F. H., Pelah, A., Fox, L. F., Lewis, J., Kane, R., & Walley, K. A. (2005). Self-motion perception during locomotor recalibration: More than meets the eye. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 398-419. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.31.3.398 PDF

Banton, T. A., Stefanucci, J., Durgin, F. H., Fass, A., & Proffitt, D. R. (2005). The perception of walking speed in a virtual environment. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 14, 394-406. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474605774785262 PDF

Messing, R. M., & Durgin, F. H. (2005). Distance perception and the visual horizon in head-mounted displays. Transactions on Applied Perception, 2, 234-250. https://doi.org/10.1145/1077399.1077403 PDF

Durgin, F. H., Fox, L. F., & Kim, D. H. (2003). Not letting the left leg know what the right leg is doing: Limb-specific locomotor adaptation to sensory-cue conflict. Psychological Science, 16, 567-572. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0956-7976.2003.psci_1466.x PDF

Durgin, F. H. (2003). Translation and competition among internal representations in a reverse Stroop effect. Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 367-378. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194568 PDF

Durgin, F. H., & Sternberg, S. (2002). The time of consciousness and vice versa. Consciousness and Cognition, 11, 284-290. https://doi.org/10.1006/ccog.2002.0566 PDF

Durgin, F. H. (2002). The Tinkerbell effect: Motion perception and illusion. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 9, 88-101 PDF

Durgin, F. H. (2001). Texture contrast aftereffects are monocular; texture density aftereffects are binocular. Vision Research, 41, 2619-2630. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(01)00121-3

Durgin, F. H., & Hammer, J. T. (2001). Visual aftereffects of sequential perception: Dynamic adaptation to changes in texture density and contrast. Vision Research, 41, 2607-2617. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(01)00120-1 PDF

Durgin, F. H. (2000). The reverse Stroop effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 121-125. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210730

Lachter, J., Durgin, F. H., & Washington, T. (2000). Disappearing percepts: Evidence for retention failure in metacontrast masking. Visual Cognition, 7, 269-279. https://doi.org/10.1080/135062800394801

Durgin, F. H. (1999). Supporting the Grand Illusion of direct perception: Implicit learning in eye-movement control. In S. R Hameroff, A. W. Kaszniak, and D. J. Chalmers, Toward a Science of Consciousness III, (pp. 179-188). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Durgin, F. H. & Pelah, A. (1999). Visuomotor adaptation without vision. Experimental Brain Research, 127, 12-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002210050769

Lachter, J., & Durgin, F. H. (1999). Metacontrast Masking functions: A question of speed? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 936-947. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.25.4.936

Durgin, F. H. & Huk, A. C. (1997). Texture density aftereffects in the perception of artificial and natural textures. Vision Research, 37, 3273-3282. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(97)00126-0 PDF

Durgin, F. H. & Wolfe, S. E. (1997). Global precedence in visual search? Not so fast: Evidence instead for an oblique effect. Perception, 26, 321-332. https://doi.org/10.1068/p260321

Durgin, F. H. (1996). Visual aftereffect of texture density contingent on color of frame. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 207-223. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211876

Durgin, F. H. & Proffitt, D. R. (1996). Visual learning in the perception of texture: simple and contingent aftereffects of texture density. Spatial Vision, 9, 423-474. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856896X00204

Durgin, F. H. (1995). Texture density adaptation and the perceived numerosity and distribution of texture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 149-169. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.21.1.149 PDF

Durgin, F. H., Proffitt, D. R., Olson, T. J. & Reinke, K.S. (1995). Comparing depth from motion with depth from binocular disparity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 679-699. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.21.3.679 PDF

Durgin, F. H., Tripathy, S. P. & Levi, D. M. (1995). On the filling in of the visual blind spot: Some rules of thumb. Perception, 24, 827-840. https://doi.org/10.1068/p240827 PDF

Gelman, R., Durgin, F. & Kaufman, L. (1995). Distinguishing between animates and inanimates: Not by motion alone. In D. Sperber, D. Premack, and A. J. Premack (Eds.), Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate (pp. 151-184). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

A Few Published Abstracts

Durgin, F. H., Fox, L. F., Lewis, J., & Walley, K. (2002). Perceptuomotor adaptation: More than meets the eye. Abstracts of the Psychonomic Society, 7, 103-104. SLIDES

Durgin, F. H. (1999). The (illusory) perception of visual detail: textures and faces. Perception, 28 (supplement), 43.

Durgin, F. H. (1999). A model of texture density encoding. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 40, S200.

Durgin, F. H., & Cole, R. (1997). Texture-density aftereffects to filled-in and suppressed portions of textures. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 38, S636.

Huk, A. C., Durgin, F. H., Banton, T. A., Aks, D., Lewis, D. A., Gold, S., & Jain, R. (1997). The Rubber Pencil Illusion: Beyond Persistence. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 38, S378.