Literature DB >> 10349763

Active and passive scene recognition across views.

R F Wang1, D J Simons.   

Abstract

Recent evidence suggests that scene recognition across views is impaired when an array of objects rotates relative to a stationary observer, but not when the observer moves relative to a stationary display [Simons, D.J., Wang, R.F., 1998. Perceiving real-world viewpoint changes. Psychological Science 9, 315-320]. The experiments in this report examine whether the relatively poorer performance by stationary observers across view changes results from a lack of perceptual information for the rotation or from the lack of active control of the perspective change, both of which are present for viewpoint changes. Three experiments compared performance when observers passively experienced the view change and when they actively caused the change. Even with visual information and active control over the display rotation, change detection performance was still worse for orientation changes than for viewpoint changes. These findings suggest that observers can update a viewer-centered representation of a scene when they move to a different viewing position, but such updating does not occur during display rotations even with visual and motor information for the magnitude of the change. This experimental approach, using arrays of real objects rather than computer displays of isolated individual objects, can shed light on mechanisms that allow accurate recognition despite changes in the observer's position and orientation.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10349763     DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0277(99)00012-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  50 in total

1.  Updating space during imagined self- and array translations.

Authors:  Sarah H Creem-Regehr
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-09

2.  Differential effects of object orientation on imaginary object/viewer transformations.

Authors:  Rob van Lier
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2003-06

Review 3.  Active and passive contributions to spatial learning.

Authors:  Elizabeth R Chrastil; William H Warren
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-02

4.  Attentional capture and hold: the oculomotor correlates of the change detection advantage for faces.

Authors:  Matthew D Weaver; Johan Lauwereyns
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2010-05-11

5.  A body-centred frame of reference drives spatial priming in visual search.

Authors:  Keira Ball; Daniel Smith; Amanda Ellison; Thomas Schenk
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-06-24       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 6.  Building a cognitive map by assembling multiple path integration systems.

Authors:  Ranxiao Frances Wang
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-06

7.  Visual, haptic and bimodal scene perception: evidence for a unitary representation.

Authors:  Helene Intraub; Frank Morelli; Kristin M Gagnier
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2015-02-25

8.  Visual and haptic representations of scenes are updated with observer movement.

Authors:  Achille Pasqualotto; Ciara M Finucane; Fiona N Newell
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-07-21       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Spatial updating in virtual reality: the sufficiency of visual information.

Authors:  Bernhard E Riecke; Douglas W Cunningham; Heinrich H Bülthoff
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2006-09-23

10.  Attentional coding of categorical relations in scene perception: evidence from the flicker paradigm.

Authors:  Luke J Rosielle; Brian T Crabb; Eric E Cooper
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.