The interaction of shape- and location-based priming in object categorisation: Evidence for a hybrid “what+where” representation stage

The relationship between part shape and location is not well elucidated in current theories of object recognition. Here we investigated the role of shape and location of object parts on recognition, using a classification priming paradigm with novel 3D objects. In Experiment 1, the relative displacement of two parts comprising the prime gradually reduced the priming effect. In Experiment 2, presenting single-part primes in locations progressively different from those in the composite target had no effect on priming. In Experiment 3, manipulating the relative position of composite prime and target strongly affected priming. Finally, in Experiment 4 the relative displacement of single-part primes and composite targets did influence response time. Together, these findings are best interpreted in terms of a hybrid theory, according to which conjunctions of shape and location are explicitly represented at some stage of visual object processing.

[1]  Barbara Hammer,et al.  Compositionality in Neural Systems , 2002 .

[2]  E. Miller,et al.  Memory fields of neurons in the primate prefrontal cortex. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  I. Biederman,et al.  Recognizing depth-rotated objects: evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  T. Poggio,et al.  Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex , 1999, Nature Neuroscience.

[5]  Kevin N. Ochsner,et al.  Varieties of priming , 1994, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[6]  S Edelman,et al.  Representation is representation of similarities , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[7]  Michael J. Tarr.  Is human object recognition better described by geon structural description or by multiple views , 1995 .

[8]  I. Biederman,et al.  Size invariance in visual object priming , 1992 .

[9]  A. Jacobs,et al.  The incremental priming technique: A method for determining within-condition priming effects , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[10]  E. Rolls.  High-level vision: Object recognition and visual cognition, Shimon Ullman. MIT Press, Bradford (1996), ISBN 0 262 21013 4 , 1997 .

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

[12]  Elinor McKone,et al.  Orientation invariance in naming rotated objects: Individual differences and repetition priming , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[13]  Nathan Intrator,et al.  A Productive, Systematic Framework for the Representation of Visual Structure , 2000, NIPS.

[14]  S C Rao,et al.  Integration of what and where in the primate prefrontal cortex. , 1997, Science.

[15]  J M Findlay,et al.  The Effect of Depth Rotation on Object Identification , 1997, Perception.

[16]  R. Vogels,et al.  Spatial sensitivity of macaque inferior temporal neurons , 2000, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[17]  I. Biederman,et al.  Priming contour-deleted images: Evidence for intermediate representations in visual object recognition , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.

[18]  I Biederman,et al.  Size Invariance in Visual Object Priming of Gray-Scale Images , 1995, Perception.

[19]  Vision Research , 1961, Nature.

[20]  M. Tarr.  Rotating objects to recognize them: A case study on the role of viewpoint dependency in the recognition of three-dimensional objects , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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

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

[23]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Neuronal selectivities to complex object features in the ventral visual pathway of the macaque cerebral cortex. , 1994, Journal of neurophysiology.

[24]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Optical Imaging of Functional Organization in the Monkey Inferotemporal Cortex , 1996, Science.

[25]  S. Edelman,et al.  Imperfect Invariance to Object Translation in the Discrimination of Complex Shapes , 2001, Perception.

[26]  Nathan Intrator,et al.  (coarse Coding of Shape Fragments) (retinotopy) Representation of Structure , 2000 .

[27]  I. Biederman,et al.  Subliminal visual priming , 1997, Neuroscience Letters.

[28]  Thomas Sanocki,et al.  Constructing structural descriptions , 1999 .

[29]  Nathan Intrator,et al.  Towards structural systematicity in distributed, statically bound visual representations , 2003, Cogn. Sci..

[30]  C. B. Cave,et al.  The Role of Parts and Spatial Relations in Object Identification , 1993, Perception.

[31]  E Tulving,et al.  Priming and human memory systems. , 1990, Science.

[32]  J. Wolfe,et al.  The Representation of Location in Visual Images , 1994, Cognitive Psychology.

[33]  Y. Yamane,et al.  Complex objects are represented in macaque inferotemporal cortex by the combination of feature columns , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[34]  I. Biederman,et al.  Recognizing depth-rotated objects: Evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance. , 1993 .

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

[36]  B. Knowlton,et al.  Long-term retinotopic priming in object identification , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[37]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Coding visual images of objects in the inferotemporal cortex of the macaque monkey. , 1991, Journal of neurophysiology.

[38]  Michael A. Arbib,et al.  The handbook of brain theory and neural networks , 1995, A Bradford book.

[39]  J. Hummel.  Complementary solutions to the binding problem in vision: Implications for shape perception and object recognition , 2001 .

[40]  M J Tarr,et al.  Is human object recognition better described by geon structural descriptions or by multiple views? Comment on Biederman and Gerhardstein (1993). , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[41]  S Edelman,et al.  A model of visual recognition and categorization. , 1997, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[42]  Heinrich H. Bülthoff,et al.  Object recognition in man, monkey, and machine , 1999 .

[43]  Irving Biederman,et al.  Invariance of long-term visual priming to scale, reflection, translation, and hemisphere , 2001, Vision Research.

[44]  Thomas O. Binford,et al.  The Recovery of Three-Dimensional Structure from Image Curves , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[45]  M. Fahle,et al.  Limited translation invariance of human visual pattern recognition , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[47]  J. Hummel,et al.  The role of attention in priming for left-right reflections of object images: evidence for a dual representation of object shape. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[48]  F N Newell,et al.  Stimulus Context and View Dependence in Object Recognition , 1998, Perception.