The role of convexity in perception of symmetry and in visual short-term memory

Visual perception of shape is affected by coding of local convexities and concavities. For instance, a recent study reported that deviations from symmetry carried by convexities were easier to detect than deviations carried by concavities. We removed some confounds and extended this work from a detection of reflection of a contour (i.e., bilateral symmetry), to a detection of repetition of a contour (i.e., translational symmetry). We tested whether any convexity advantage is specific to bilateral symmetry in a two-interval (Experiment 1) and a single-interval (Experiment 2) detection task. In both, we found a convexity advantage only for repetition. When we removed the need to choose which region of the contour to monitor (Experiment 3) the effect disappeared. In a second series of studies, we again used shapes with multiple convex or concave features. Participants performed a change detection task in which only one of the features could change. We did not find any evidence that convexities are special in visual short-term memory, when the to-be-remembered features only changed shape (Experiment 4), when they changed shape and changed from concave to convex and vice versa (Experiment 5), or when these conditions were mixed (Experiment 6). We did find a small advantage for coding convexity as well as concavity over an isolated (and thus ambiguous) contour. The latter is consistent with the known effect of closure on processing of shape. We conclude that convexity plays a role in many perceptual tasks but that it does not have a basic encoding advantage over concavity.

[1]  J. Hulleman,et al.  Concavities as basic features in visual search: Evidence from search asymmetries , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[2]  R. Arnheim Art and Visual Perception, a Psychology of the Creative Eye , 1967 .

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

[4]  James Elder,et al.  The effect of contour closure on the rapid discrimination of two-dimensional shapes , 1993, Vision Research.

[5]  Vicky G Bruce,et al.  Violations of Symmetry and Repetition in Visual Patterns , 1975 .

[6]  Marco Bertamini,et al.  Visual search for a circular region perceived as a figure versus as a hole: Evidence of the importance of part structure , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.

[7]  R. Arnheim Art and visual perception: A psychology of the creative eye, New version , 1955 .

[8]  Jacob Feldman,et al.  Detection of change in shape: an advantage for concavities , 2003, Cognition.

[9]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  A shape-contrast effect for briefly presented stimuli. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  H. Barlow,et al.  The versatility and absolute efficiency of detecting mirror symmetry in random dot displays , 1979, Vision Research.

[11]  H H Bülthoff,et al.  A Prior for Global Convexity in Local Shape-from-Shading , 2001, Perception.

[12]  Marco Bertamini,et al.  The Perceived Structural Shape of Thin (wire-like) Objects is Different from That of Silhouettes , 2006, Perception.

[13]  Jonathan W Peirce,et al.  Global shape processing: which parts form the whole? , 2010, Journal of vision.

[14]  Johan Hulleman,et al.  Concavities count for less in symmetry perception , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[15]  M. Bertamini,et al.  The Importance of Being Convex: An Advantage for Convexity when Judging Position , 2001, Perception.

[16]  Satoru Suzuki,et al.  Attentional selection of overlapped shapes: a study using brief shape aftereffects , 2003, Vision Research.

[17]  Stephen Wallace,et al.  Figure and Ground , 1982 .

[18]  B. Gibson Visual attention and objects: one versus two or convex versus concave? , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[19]  V Bruce,et al.  Independent Effects of Lighting, Orientation, and Stereopsis on the Hollow-Face Illusion , 1993, Perception.

[20]  Marco Bertamini,et al.  Detection of convexity and concavity in context. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  Jan J. Koenderink,et al.  Solid shape , 1990 .

[22]  Walter Gerbino,et al.  Convexity and Symmetry in Figure-Ground Organization , 1976 .

[23]  Edward K. Vogel,et al.  The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions , 1997, Nature.

[24]  Marco Bertamini,et al.  Sensitivity to Reflection and Translation is Modulated by Objectness , 2010, Perception.

[25]  A. Johnston,et al.  Recognising Faces: Effects of Lighting Direction, Inversion, and Brightness Reversal , 2013, Perception.

[26]  Ernst Mach,et al.  The analysis of sensations and the relation of the physical to the psychical , 1914, The Mathematical Gazette.

[27]  Manish Singh,et al.  What change detection tells us about the visual representation of shape. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[28]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  A Search Asymmetry Reversed by Figure-Ground Assignment , 2000, Psychological science.

[29]  J J Koenderink,et al.  What Does the Occluding Contour Tell Us about Solid Shape? , 1984, Perception.

[30]  N. Cowan The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[31]  Jacob Feldman,et al.  Visual comparisons within and between object parts: evidence for a single-part superiority effect , 2003, Vision Research.

[32]  Marco Bertamini,et al.  The shape of holes , 2003, Cognition.

[33]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  The concavity effect is a compound of local and global effects , 2007, Perception & psychophysics.

[34]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[35]  Elena Gheorghiu,et al.  Orientation tuning of curvature adaptation reveals both curvature-polarity-selective and non-selective mechanisms. , 2009, Journal of vision.

[36]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  Privileged coding of convex shapes in human object-selective cortex. , 2008, Journal of neurophysiology.