Independent Processing of Parts and of Their Spatial Organization in Complex Visual Objects

A visual search experiment using synthetic three-dimensional objects is reported. The target shared its constituent parts, the spatial organization of its parts, or both with the distractors displayed with it. Sharing of parts and sharing of spatial organization both negatively affected visual search performance, and these effects were strictly additive. These findings support theories of complex visual object perception that assume a parsing of the stimulus into its higher-order constituents (volumetric parts or visible surfaces). The additivity of the effects demonstrates that information on parts and information on spatial organization are processed independently in visual search.

[1]  Donald D. Hoffman,et al.  Parts of recognition , 1984, Cognition.

[2]  D Marr,et al.  Theory of edge detection , 1979, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[3]  Donald D. Hoffman,et al.  Parsing silhouettes: The short-cut rule , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[4]  J. Hummel,et al.  Connectedness and the integration of parts with relations in shape perception. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  Isabel Gauthier,et al.  Three-dimensional object recognition is viewpoint dependent , 1998, Nature Neuroscience.

[6]  Refractor.  Vision , 2000, The Lancet.

[7]  Martin Arguin,et al.  Shape Integration for Visual Object Recognition and Its Implication in Category-Specific Visual Agnosia , 1996 .

[8]  A. Pentland.  Shape information from shading: A theory about human perception , 1989 .

[9]  S. Palmer.  Hierarchical structure in perceptual representation , 1977, Cognitive Psychology.

[10]  Martin Arguin,et al.  Conjunction and linear non-separability effects in visual shape encoding , 2000, Vision Research.

[11]  Donald D. Hoffman,et al.  Salience of visual parts , 1997, Cognition.

[12]  Brian J Stankiewicz,et al.  Empirical evidence for independent dimensions in the visual representation of three-dimensional shape. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  M. Kurbat.  Structural Description Theories: Is RBC/JIM a General-Purpose Theory of Human Entry-Level Object Recognition? , 1994, Perception.

[14]  Heinrich H Bülthoff,et al.  Image-based object recognition in man, monkey and machine , 1998, Cognition.

[15]  Nk Logothetis,et al.  Image-based Object Recognition. , 1994 .

[16]  Martin Arguin,et al.  Orientation invariance in visual object priming depends on prime—target asynchrony , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  Daphna Weinshall,et al.  A self-organizing multiple-view representation of 3D objects , 2004, Biological Cybernetics.

[18]  Rae-Hong Park,et al.  A surface-based approach to 3-D object recognition using a mean field annealing neural network , 2002, Pattern Recognit..

[19]  Brian P. Dyre,et al.  Perceptual similarity of shapes generated from Fourier descriptors. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  Martin Arguin,et al.  Distinct Mechanisms Account for the Linear non–Separability and Conjunction Effects in Visual Shape Encoding , 2003, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

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

[22]  I. Biederman,et al.  Surface versus edge-based determinants of visual recognition , 1988, Cognitive Psychology.

[23]  Joachim M. Buhmann,et al.  Distortion Invariant Object Recognition in the Dynamic Link Architecture , 1993, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[24]  W. Hayward,et al.  Viewpoint Dependence and Object Discriminability , 2000, Psychological science.

[25]  S. Ullman.  Aligning pictorial descriptions: An approach to object recognition , 1989, Cognition.

[26]  D. Marr,et al.  Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes , 1978, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[27]  S. Palmer,et al.  Rethinking perceptual organization: The role of uniform connectedness , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[28]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Parallel computation of primitive shape descriptions. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  T. Poggio,et al.  A network that learns to recognize three-dimensional objects , 1990, Nature.

[30]  J. Hummel,et al.  Connectedness and part-relation integration in shape category learning , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[31]  S. Kosslyn.  Image and Brain: The Resolution of the Imagery Debate , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[32]  I. Biederman,et al.  Dynamic binding in a neural network for shape recognition. , 1992, Psychological review.