Subjectively interpreted shape dimensions as privileged and orthogonal axes in mental shape space.

The shape of an object is fundamental in object recognition but it is still an open issue to what extent shape differences are perceived analytically (i.e., by the dimensional structure of the shapes) or holistically (i.e., by the overall similarity of the shapes). The dimensional structure of a stimulus is available in a primary stage of processing for separable dimensions, although it can also be derived cognitively from a perceived stimulus consisting of integral dimensions. Contrary to most experimental paradigms, the present study asked participants explicitly to analyze shapes according to two dimensions. The dimensions of interest were aspect ratio and medial axis curvature, and a new procedure was used to measure the participants' interpretation of both dimensions (Part I, Experiment 1). The subjectively interpreted shape dimensions showed specific characteristics supporting the conclusion that they also constitute perceptual dimensions with objective behavioral characteristics (Part II): (1) the dimensions did not correlate in overall similarity measures (Experiment 2), (2) they were more separable in a speeded categorization task (Experiment 3), and (3) they were invariant across different complex 2-D shapes (Experiment 4). The implications of these findings for shape-based object processing are discussed.

[1]  L. Kaufman,et al.  Handbook of Perception and Human Performance. Volume 2. Cognitive Processes and Performance , 1994 .

[2]  W. R. Garner.  The Processing of Information and Structure , 1974 .

[3]  James R. Pomerantz,et al.  Attention and object perception. , 1989 .

[4]  Gregory Ashby,et al.  Toward a Unified Theory of Similarity and Recognition , 1988 .

[5]  Lawrence E. Marks,et al.  Early-holistic processing or dimensional similarity? , 1993 .

[6]  W. T. Maddox,et al.  A response time theory of separability and integrality in speeded classification , 1994 .

[7]  Nicole C. Rust,et al.  In praise of artifice , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[8]  P. O. Bishop,et al.  Spatial vision. , 1971, Annual review of psychology.

[9]  I. Biederman,et al.  Tuning for shape dimensions in macaque inferior temporal cortex , 2005, The European journal of neuroscience.

[10]  Nicole C. Rust,et al.  Do We Know What the Early Visual System Does? , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[11]  R. Vogels,et al.  Effects of Category Learning on the Stimulus Selectivity of Macaque References , 2022 .

[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]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Levels of experienced dimensionality in children and adults , 1978, Cognitive Psychology.

[14]  D. Heeger.  The Representation of Visual Stimuli in Primary Visual Cortex , 1994 .

[15]  Lawrence C. Sager,et al.  Perception of wholes and of their component parts: some configural superiority effects. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  L E Marks,et al.  Primacy of dimensions in color perception. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  R. Vogels,et al.  Inferotemporal neurons represent low-dimensional configurations of parameterized shapes , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[18]  D. Norman.  Learning and Memory , 1982 .

[19]  T. B. Ward,et al.  Classifying multidimensional stimuli: stimulus, task, and observer factors. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  S Marcelja,et al.  Mathematical description of the responses of simple cortical cells. , 1980, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[21]  Patricia W. Cheng,et al.  A psychophysical approach to dimensional separability , 1984, Cognitive Psychology.

[22]  L. Kaufman,et al.  Cognitive processes and performance , 1986 .

[23]  N. Perrin,et al.  Varieties of perceptual independence. , 1986, Psychological review.

[24]  R. Nosofsky.  American Psychological Association, Inc. Choice, Similarity, and the Context Theory of Classification , 2022 .

[25]  J. Wagemans,et al.  Segmentation of object outlines into parts: A large-scale integrative study , 2006, Cognition.

[26]  J. Gibson.  The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1979 .

[27]  Soledad Ballesteros,et al.  Object Perception : Structure and Process , 2013 .

[28]  W. R. Garner,et al.  Operationism and the concept of perception. , 1956, Psychological review.

[29]  D. Foster,et al.  Recognizing novel three–dimensional objects by summing signals from parts and views , 2002, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[30]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Perceptual saliency of points along the contour of everyday objects: a large-scale study. , 2010, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[32]  J. Duncan.  Selective attention and the organization of visual information. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[33]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Viewpoint-invariant Weber fractions and standard contour-curvature discrimination , 1993, Biological Cybernetics.

[34]  S. Imai,et al.  The free classification of analyzable and unanalyzable stimuli , 1972 .

[35]  Arthur P. Ginsburg,et al.  Spatial filtering and visual form perception. , 1986 .

[36]  Colin Potts,et al.  Design of Everyday Things , 1988 .

[37]  R. Shepard.  Attention and the metric structure of the stimulus space. , 1964 .

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

[39]  James R Pomerantz,et al.  Wholes, holes, and basic features in vision , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[40]  J. Wagemans,et al.  Low-level correlations between object properties and viewpoint can cause viewpoint-dependent object recognition. , 2007, Spatial vision.

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

[42]  J. R. Pomerantz,et al.  Emergent features, attention, and perceptual glue in visual form perception. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[43]  David H. Foster,et al.  The cue for contour-curvature discrimination , 1993, Vision Research.

[44]  Leola A. Alfonso-Reese.  Technique for estimating perceptual noise in categorization tasks , 2001, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[45]  L. Kaufman,et al.  Handbook of perception and human performance , 1986 .

[46]  Gregory Ashby,et al.  A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning. , 1998, Psychological review.

[47]  C. F. Foard,et al.  Holistic and analytic modes of processing: the multiple determinants of perceptual analysis. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[48]  Bryan E. Shepp.  On perceiving objects: Holistic versus featural properties. , 1989 .

[49]  G. Lockhead.  Processing dimensional stimuli: a note. , 1972, Psychological review.

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

[51]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  The effect of category learning on the representation of shape: dimensions can be biased but not differentiated. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[52]  W. R. Garner,et al.  Integrality of stimulus dimensions in various types of information processing , 1970 .

[53]  R. K. Simpson.  Nature Neuroscience , 2022 .

[54]  D. K. Nelson,et al.  Processing integral dimensions: the whole view. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[55]  I. Rock,et al.  Perceptual organization and attention , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.