Literature DB >> 18926985

Memory for objects in canonical and noncanonical viewpoints.

Pablo Gomez1, Jennifer Shutter, Jeffrey N Rouder.   

Abstract

This article investigates how the perspective from which we see an object affects memory. Object identification can be affected by the orientation of the object. Palmer, Rosch, and Chase (1981) coined the term canonical to describe perspectives in which identification performance is best. We present two experiments that tested the effects of object perspective on memory. Our results revealed a double dissociation between task (recognition and recall) and type of object perspective. In recognition, items studied in the noncanonical viewpoint produced higher proportions of "old" responses than did items studied in the canonical viewpoint, whereas new objects presented from a noncanonical viewpoint produced fewer "old" responses than did new objects presented from the canonical viewpoint. In free recall, conversely, objects studied from the noncanonical viewpoint produced lower recall rates than did objects studied from the canonical viewpoint. These results, which reveal a pattern similar to word frequency effects, support the psychological reality of canonical viewpoints and the frequency-of-exposure-based accounts of canonical viewpoint effects.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18926985     DOI: 10.3758/PBR.15.5.940

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  19 in total

1.  Orientation dependence in the recognition of familiar and novel views of three-dimensional objects.

Authors:  S Edelman; H H Bülthoff
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  The word frequency effect for recognition memory and the elevated-attention hypothesis.

Authors:  Kenneth J Malmberg; Thomas O Nelson
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-01

3.  Interactions between study task, study time, and the low-frequency hit rate advantage in recognition memory.

Authors:  Amy H Criss; Richard M Shiffrin
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 3.051

4.  A model for recognition memory: REM-retrieving effectively from memory.

Authors:  R M Shiffrin; M Steyvers
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1997-06

5.  Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding.

Authors:  Irving Biederman
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1987-04       Impact factor: 8.934

6.  Is human object recognition better described by geon structural descriptions or by multiple views? Comment on Biederman and Gerhardstein (1993).

Authors:  M J Tarr; H H Bülthoff
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Reflections of the mirror effect for item and associative recognition.

Authors:  W E Hockley
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1994-11

8.  The mirror effect in recognition memory.

Authors:  M Glanzer; J K Adams
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1985-01

9.  A retrieval model for both recognition and recall.

Authors:  G Gillund; R M Shiffrin
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  The word-frequency paradox for recall/recognition occurs for pictures.

Authors:  Paul Johan Karlsen; Joan Gay Snodgrass
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2003-06-25
View more
  7 in total

1.  Not all perceptual difficulties lower memory predictions: Testing the perceptual fluency hypothesis with rotated and inverted object images.

Authors:  Miri Besken; Elif Cemre Solmaz; Meltem Karaca; Nilsu Atılgan
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2019-07

2.  Generalization between canonical and non-canonical views in object recognition.

Authors:  Tandra Ghose; Zili Liu
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-01-02       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  The Bank of Standardized Stimuli (BOSS), a new set of 480 normative photos of objects to be used as visual stimuli in cognitive research.

Authors:  Mathieu B Brodeur; Emmanuelle Dionne-Dostie; Tina Montreuil; Martin Lepage
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-05-24       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Dynamics of 3D view invariance in monkey inferotemporal cortex.

Authors:  N Apurva Ratan Murty; Sripati P Arun
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-01-21       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Testing the reliability of hands and ears as biometrics: the importance of viewpoint.

Authors:  Sarah V Stevenage; Catherine Walpole; Greg J Neil; Sue M Black
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2014-11-20

6.  Color Image Norms in Mandarin Chinese.

Authors:  Dandan Zhou; Qi Chen
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-10-25

7.  Variation of picture angles and its effect on the Concealed Information Test.

Authors:  Ann Hsu; Yu-Hui Lo; Shi-Chiang Ke; Lin Lin; Philip Tseng
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2020-07-31
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.