Revisiting Rossion and Pourtois with new ratings for automated complexity, familiarity, beauty, and encounter

Differences between norm ratings collected when participants are asked to consider more than one picture characteristic are contrasted with the traditional methodological approaches of collecting ratings separately for image constructs. We present data that suggest that reporting normative data, based on methodological procedures that ask participants to consider multiple image constructs simultaneously, could potentially confounded norm data. We provide data for two new image constructs, beauty and the extent to which participants encountered the stimuli in their everyday lives. Analysis of this data suggests that familiarity and encounter are tapping different image constructs. The extent to which an observer encounters an object predicts human judgments of visual complexity. Encountering an image was also found to be an important predictor of beauty, but familiarity with that image was not. Taken together, these results suggest that continuing to collect complexity measures from human judgments is a pointless exercise. Automated measures are more reliable and valid measures, which are demonstrated here as predicting human preferences.

[1]  Antonino Santos,et al.  Computerized measures of visual complexity. , 2015, Acta psychologica.

[2]  F ATTNEAVE,et al.  The quantitative study of shape and pattern perception. , 1956, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  D. Berlyne,et al.  Aesthetics and Psychobiology , 1975 .

[4]  Juan Segui,et al.  Predictors of picture naming speed , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[5]  J. Beck,et al.  Contrast and spatial variables in texture segregation: Testing a simple spatial-frequency channels model , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[6]  F. Attneave Some informational aspects of visual perception. , 1954, Psychological review.

[7]  Toby J. Lloyd-Jones,et al.  Sources of error in picture naming under time pressure , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[8]  Richard L. Moreland,et al.  Exposure effects may not depend on stimulus recognition. , 1979 .

[9]  R. Moreland,et al.  The Mere Exposure Phenomenon: A Lingering Melody by Robert Zajonc , 2010 .

[10]  Martin B. Curry,et al.  Measuring symbol and icon characteristics: Norms for concreteness, complexity, meaningfulness, familiarity, and semantic distance for 239 symbols , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[11]  Christopher Barry,et al.  The influence of age of acquisition in word reading and other tasks : A never ending story ? , 2004 .

[12]  Claude E. Shannon,et al.  A mathematical theory of communication , 1948, MOCO.

[13]  R. Proctor,et al.  Index of norms and ratings published in the Psychonomic Society journals , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[14]  F Cuetos,et al.  Naming times for the Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures in Spanish , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[15]  Geoffrey B. Duggan,et al.  Age of Acquisition, Ageing, and Verb Production: Normative and Experimental Data , 2003, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[16]  Dennis M. Levi,et al.  Reaction time as a measure of suprathreshold grating detection , 1978, Vision Research.

[17]  Toby J. Lloyd-Jones,et al.  Outline shape is a mediator of object recognition that is particularly important for living things , 2002, Memory & cognition.

[18]  M. Vitkovitch,et al.  Sources of Disagreement in Object Naming , 1995 .

[19]  A. Paivio,et al.  Cognitive components of picture naming. , 1996, Psychological bulletin.

[20]  Noel Sheehy,et al.  Measuring icon complexity: An automated analysis , 2003, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[21]  Patrick Bonin,et al.  The determinants of spoken and written picture naming latencies. , 2002, British journal of psychology.

[22]  Ralph E. Geiselman,et al.  Perceptual Discriminability as a Basis for Selecting Graphic Symbols , 1982 .

[23]  H. Leder,et al.  Examining Complexity across Domains: Relating Subjective and Objective Measures of Affective Environmental Scenes, Paintings and Music , 2013, PloS one.

[24]  R. Zajonc Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. , 1968 .

[25]  Martin B. Curry,et al.  Exploring the effects of icon characteristics on user performance: the role of icon concreteness, complexity, and distinctiveness. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[26]  Christopher Barry,et al.  Naming the Snodgrass and Vanderwart Pictures: Effects of Age of Acquisition, Frequency, and Name Agreement , 1997 .

[27]  C. Cela-Conde,et al.  Predicting beauty: fractal dimension and visual complexity in art. , 2011, British journal of psychology.

[28]  J HOCHBERG,et al.  The psychophysics of form: reversible-perspective drawings of spatial objects. , 1960, The American journal of psychology.

[29]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Cascade processes in picture identification , 1988 .

[30]  N Graham,et al.  Lightness differences and the perceived segregation of regions and populations , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[31]  A. Paivio,et al.  Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

[32]  Jackie Masterson,et al.  Object and action picture naming in English and Greek , 2003 .

[33]  Lorella Lotto,et al.  Naming times and standardized norms for the italian PD/DPSS set of 266 pictures: Direct comparisons with American, English, French, and Spanish published databases , 2000, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[34]  Gerry Mulhern,et al.  Confounds in pictorial sets: The role of complexity and familiarity in basic-level picture processing , 2008, Behavior research methods.

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

[36]  M. Lévesque Perception , 1986, The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine.

[37]  C. E. SHANNON,et al.  A mathematical theory of communication , 1948, MOCO.

[38]  R. Moreland,et al.  Is stimulus recognition a necessary condition for the occurrence of exposure effects? , 1977, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[39]  B. Rossion,et al.  Revisiting Snodgrass and Vanderwart's Object Pictorial Set: The Role of Surface Detail in Basic-Level Object Recognition , 2004, Perception.

[40]  R. Bornstein Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. , 1989 .

[41]  Catriona M. Morrison,et al.  Lexical determinants of semantic processing speed , 2006 .

[42]  O. Reiser,et al.  Principles Of Gestalt Psychology , 1936 .

[43]  Jon Andoni Duñabeitia,et al.  A standardized set of 260 pictures for Modern Greek: Norms for name agreement, age of acquisition, and visual complexity , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[44]  Joan Gay Snodgrass,et al.  Naming times for the Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures , 1996 .

[45]  E. E. Rump Is there a general factor of preference for complexity? , 1968 .

[46]  Hua Shu,et al.  Predictors of timed picture naming in Chinese , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[47]  Catriona M. Morrison,et al.  Real age-of-acquisition effects in lexical retrieval. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[48]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  Timed picture naming in seven languages , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[49]  Jean Paul,et al.  Vorschule der Ästhetik , 1990 .

[50]  J. G. Snodgrass,et al.  A standardized set of 260 pictures: norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[51]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[52]  A. Vassilev,et al.  Perception time and spatial frequency , 1976, Vision Research.

[53]  John T. Stasko,et al.  Development and Validation of Icons Varying in their Abstractness , 1994, Interact. Comput..

[54]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Age of Acquisition Effects in Word Reading and Other Tasks , 2002 .