Orientation-specific possibility priming for novel three-dimensional objects

Priming effects on the object possibility task, in which participants decide whether line drawings could or could not be possible three-dimensional objects, may be supported by the same processes and representations used in recognizing and identifying objects. Three experiments manipulating objects’ picture-plane orientation provided limited support for this hypothesis. Like old/new recognition performance, possibility priming declined as study-test orientation differences increased from 0° to 60°. However, while significant possibility priming was not observed for larger orientation differences, recognition performance continued to decline following 60°–180° orientation shifts. These results suggest that possibility priming and old/new recognition may rely on common viewpoint-specific representations but that access to these representations in the possibility test occurs only when study and test views are sufficiently similar (i.e., rotated less than 60°).

[1]  Tomaso A. Poggio,et al.  3D Object Recognition: A Model of View-Tuned Neurons , 1996, NIPS.

[2]  S. Edelman,et al.  Orientation dependence in the recognition of familiar and novel views of three-dimensional objects , 1992, Vision Research.

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

[4]  M. Tarr,et al.  Mental rotation and orientation-dependence in shape recognition , 1989, Cognitive Psychology.

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

[6]  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.

[7]  I. Rock,et al.  The effect on form perception of change of orientation in the third dimension. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  Daniel L. Schacter,et al.  Brain regions associated with retrieval of structurally coherent visual information , 1995, Nature.

[9]  C. Moore,et al.  Orientation affects both structural and episodic representations of 3-D objects , 1991 .

[10]  D. Schacter.  Understanding implicit memory. A cognitive neuroscience approach. , 1992, The American psychologist.

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

[12]  R. Weale.  Vision. A Computational Investigation Into the Human Representation and Processing of Visual Information. David Marr , 1983 .

[13]  Daniel L. Schacter,et al.  Dissociations Between Structural and Episodic Representations of Visual Objects , 1992 .

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

[15]  P. Jolicoeur.  The time to name disoriented natural objects , 1985, Memory & cognition.

[16]  H H Bülthoff,et al.  Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  R. Shepard,et al.  Mental Images and Their Transformations , 1982 .

[18]  D. Perrett,et al.  Evidence accumulation in cell populations responsive to faces: an account of generalisation of recognition without mental transformations , 1998, Cognition.

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

[20]  L. Cooper,et al.  Implicit memory for unfamiliar objects depends on access to structural descriptions , 1990 .

[21]  R Ratcliff,et al.  Bias in the priming of object decisions. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[22]  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.

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

[24]  M. Tarr,et al.  Structural processing and implicit memory for possible and impossible figures. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[25]  R. Rosenthal,et al.  Contrast Analysis: Focused Comparisons in the Analysis of Variance , 1985 .

[26]  W. Hayward.  Effects of outline shape in object recognition , 1998 .