Surface construal and the mental representation of scenes.

What distinguishes scenes from nonscenes? Photographs of objects on both naturalistic and blank backgrounds yielded boundary extension (BE: memory for unseen spatial expanse outside the picture's boundaries). However, line-drawn objects on blank backgrounds did not (Experiment 1). Perhaps the blank background was construed as depicting a real-world surface in the photograph condition but was construed as depicting nothing in the line-drawn condition. To change background construal, the authors used objects cut out of photographs; these were placed on blank backgrounds while viewers watched (Experiments 2 and 3). BE was eliminated. The authors propose that amodal continuation is a fundamental aspect of scene perception. However, not all pictures are scenes--only pictures construed as depicting a truncated view of a continuous world.

[1]  Helene Intraub,et al.  Beyond the edges of a picture. , 1996 .

[2]  P. Kellman,et al.  A common mechanism for illusory and occluded object completion. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  W. Epstein,et al.  Priming Spatial Layout of Scenes , 1997 .

[4]  Judy S. DeLoache,et al.  Early Understanding and Use of Symbols: The Model Model , 1995 .

[5]  David E. Irwin.  Information integration across saccadic eye movements , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.

[6]  J. Freyd,et al.  Probing the time course of representational momentum. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[7]  H. Intraub,et al.  Boundary Extension for Briefly Glimpsed Photographs: Do Common Perceptual Processes Result in Unexpected Memory Distortions? , 1996 .

[8]  Helene Intraub,et al.  Anticipatory spatial representation of natural scenes: Momentum without movement? , 2002 .

[9]  F. Previc.  The neuropsychology of 3-D space. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.

[10]  Philip J Kellman,et al.  Surface integration influences depth discrimination , 2000, Vision Research.

[11]  K Nakayama,et al.  Experiencing and perceiving visual surfaces. , 1992, Science.

[12]  Christopher B. Currie,et al.  Visual stability across saccades while viewing complex pictures. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  Ronald A. Rensink,et al.  TO SEE OR NOT TO SEE: The Need for Attention to Perceive Changes in Scenes , 1997 .

[14]  J. Grimes.  On the failure to detect changes in scenes across saccades. , 1996 .

[15]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  Mental Imagery of Faces and Places Activates Corresponding Stimulus-Specific Brain Regions , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[16]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Amodal Representation of Occluded Surfaces: Role of Invisible Stimuli in Apparent Motion Correspondence , 1990, Perception.

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

[18]  Julian Hochberg,et al.  Representation of motion and space in video and cinematic displays , 1986 .

[19]  Zijiang J. He,et al.  Surfaces versus features in visual search , 1992, Nature.

[20]  T. L. Hubbard,et al.  Displacement in depth: Representational momentum and boundary extension , 1996, Psychological research.

[21]  P. Kellman,et al.  A theory of visual interpolation in object perception , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.

[22]  D. E. Irwin,et al.  Perceiving an integrated visual world , 1993 .

[23]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  A cortical representation of the local visual environment , 1998, Nature.

[24]  G. Butterworth,et al.  Michotte's experimental phenomenology of perception , 1994 .

[25]  H. Intraub,et al.  Effects of perceiving and imagining scenes on memory for pictures. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[26]  T. Hubbard,et al.  Environmental invariants in the representation of motion: Implied dynamics and representational momentum, gravity, friction, and centripetal force , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[27]  S. Yantis.  Perceived Continuity of Occluded Visual Objects , 1995 .

[28]  J. O'Regan,et al.  Solving the "real" mysteries of visual perception: the world as an outside memory. , 1992, Canadian journal of psychology.

[29]  H. Intraub.  The representation of visual scenes , 1997, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[30]  H. Intraub,et al.  Wide-angle memories of close-up scenes. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[31]  P J Kellman,et al.  Surface Completion Complements Boundary Interpolation in the Visual Integration of Partly Occluded Objects , 1997, Perception.

[32]  C V Gottesman,et al.  Wide-angle memories of close-up scenes: A demonstration of boundary extension , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[33]  H. Intraub.  Internalized constraints in the representation of spatial layout , 2001 .

[34]  H. Hock,et al.  The abstraction of schematic representations from photographs of real-world scenes , 1980, Memory & cognition.

[35]  Ronald A. Rensink,et al.  On the Failure to Detect Changes in Scenes Across Brief Interruptions , 2000 .

[36]  I. Biederman,et al.  Searching for objects in real-world scences. , 1973, Journal of experimental psychology.

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

[38]  H Intraub,et al.  Looking at pictures but remembering scenes. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[39]  D. Simons,et al.  CHAPTER 13 – Change Blindness , 2005 .