Facilitation by view combination and coherent motion in dynamic object recognition

We compared the effect of motion cues on people's ability to: (1) recognize dynamic objects by combining information from more than one view and (2) perform more efficiently on views that followed the global direction of the trained views. Participants learned to discriminate two objects that were either structurally similar or distinct and that were rotating in depth in either a coherent or scrambled motion sequence. The Training views revealed 60 degrees of the object, with a center 30 degrees segment missing. For similar stimuli only, there was a facilitative effect of motion: Performance in the coherent condition was better on views following the training views than on equidistant preceding views. Importantly, the viewpoint between the two training viewpoints was responded to more efficiently than either the Pre- or Post-Training viewpoints for both the coherent and scrambled condition. The results indicate that view combination and processing coherent motion cues may occur through different processes.

[1]  David Waller,et al.  View combination in scene recognition , 2008, Memory & cognition.

[2]  T. Poggio,et al.  Symmetric 3D objects are an easy case for 2D object recognition. , 1994, Spatial vision.

[3]  M. Shiffrar,et al.  The visual representation of three-dimensional, rotating objects. , 1999, Acta psychologica.

[4]  Johannes Schultz,et al.  A dynamic object-processing network: metric shape discrimination of dynamic objects by activation of occipitotemporal, parietal, and frontal cortices. , 2008, Cerebral cortex.

[5]  Ken Nakayama,et al.  Distinct mechanisms for the representation of moving and static objects , 2002 .

[6]  Irving Biederman,et al.  Learning an object from multiple views enhances its recognition in an orthogonal rotational axis in pigeons , 2002, Vision Research.

[7]  H. Bülthoff,et al.  Effects of temporal association on recognition memory , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[8]  J. Freyd.  Dynamic mental representations. , 1987, Psychological review.

[9]  A Friedman,et al.  The effect of distinctive parts on recognition of depth-rotated objects by pigeons (Columba livia) and humans. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[10]  Vision Research , 1961, Nature.

[11]  Aaron P. Blaisdell,et al.  Dynamic object perception by pigeons: discrimination of action in video presentations , 2001, Animal Cognition.

[12]  Robert G Cook,et al.  The role of video coherence on object-based motion discriminations by pigeons. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[13]  Alinda Friedman,et al.  Dynamic object recognition in pigeons and humans , 2006, Learning & behavior.

[14]  I. Biederman.  Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. , 1987, Psychological review.

[15]  R. Shepard,et al.  Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. , 1987, Science.

[16]  Stephen E. Palmer,et al.  Perception of partly occluded objects: A microgenetic analysis. , 1992 .

[17]  Z Kourtzi,et al.  Visual representation of malleable and rigid objects that deform as they rotate. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  G K Humphrey,et al.  Encoding ‘Regular’ and ‘Random’ Sequences of Views of Novel Three-Dimensional Objects , 1999, Perception.

[19]  R. Cook,et al.  Dynamic object perception by pigeons. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[20]  H H Bülthoff,et al.  Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  W. Singer,et al.  The Cortical Representation of Objects Rotating in Depth , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[22]  Taosheng Liu,et al.  Learning sequence of views of three-dimensional objects: the effect of temporal coherence on object memory. , 2010, Perception.

[23]  M. Tarr,et al.  Rotation direction affects object recognition , 2004, Vision Research.

[24]  Alinda Friedman,et al.  View combination in moving objects: The role of motion in discriminating between novel views of similar and distinctive objects by humans and pigeons , 2009, Vision Research.

[25]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Prior experience of rotation is not required for recognizing objects seen from different angles , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[26]  M. Tarr,et al.  To What Extent Do Unique Parts Influence Recognition Across Changes in Viewpoint? , 1995 .

[27]  James V. Stone.  Object recognition using spatiotemporal signatures , 1998, Vision Research.

[28]  Alinda Friedman,et al.  Recognizing rotated views of objects: Interpolation versus generalization by humans and pigeons , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[29]  S. Edelman,et al.  Orientation dependence in the recognition of familiar and novel views of three-dimensional objects , 1992, Vision Research.

[30]  J. Freyd,et al.  A velocity effect for representational momentum , 1985 .

[31]  Marcia L. Spetch,et al.  Recognition by humans and pigeons of novel views of 3-D objects and their photographs. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[32]  Michael J Tarr,et al.  Structural Similarity and Spatiotemporal Noise Effects on Learning Dynamic Novel Objects , 2006, Perception.

[33]  C. Reed,et al.  Conceptual effects on representational momentum. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[34]  James V. Stone,et al.  Object recognition: view-specificity and motion-specificity , 1999, Vision Research.

[35]  M. Masson,et al.  Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[36]  Shimon Edelman,et al.  Representation and recognition in vision , 1999 .

[37]  S. Ullman.  Three-dimensional object recognition based on the combination of views , 1998, Cognition.

[38]  Taosheng Liu,et al.  Learning Sequence of Views of Three-Dimensional Objects: The Effect of Temporal Coherence on Object Memory , 2007 .

[39]  Ludwig Huber,et al.  Limits of dynamic object perception in pigeons: Dynamic stimulus presentation does not enhance perception and discrimination of complex shape , 2006, Learning & behavior.