Literature DB >> 19806959

Translational and reflectional priming invariance: a retrospective.

Irving Biederman1, Eric E Cooper.   

Abstract

Biederman and Cooper (1991a) showed that the presentation of a briefly presented image of an object at one position in the visual field facilitated its identification, as assessed by naming speed and accuracy, several minutes later. The facilitation was unaffected by a translation or a reflection of the stimulus. A component of this priming was visual rather than basic-level conceptual or lexical in that there was less facilitation for an object with the same name (and basic-level class) but a different shape. The invariance of priming to view variables has stood up well over the years and appears to be a general phenomenon--as long as the original structural description can be readily resolved--in that it has also been observed for variations in size and orientation in depth. Although priming was unaffected by a change in position, we documented that there was explicit memory for the position (and orientation and size) of the stimulus. The existence of two forms of representation from the identical stimulus presentation--one invariant and the other dependent on view variables--poses a challenge as to what can be concluded about view invariance from single-unit activity.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19806959     DOI: 10.1068/pmkbie

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perception        ISSN: 0301-0066            Impact factor:   1.490


  10 in total

1.  Memory processes underlying long-term semantic priming.

Authors:  Christopher Was; Dan Woltz; Dale Hirsch
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2019-02

2.  Beyond core knowledge: Natural geometry.

Authors:  Elizabeth Spelke; Sang Ah Lee; Véronique Izard
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2010-05-01

3.  Local and global level-priming occurs for hierarchical stimuli composed of outlined, but not filled-in, elements.

Authors:  Alexandra List; Marcia Grabowecky; Satoru Suzuki
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-02-18       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Separability of abstract-category and specific-exemplar visual object subsystems: evidence from fMRI pattern analysis.

Authors:  Brenton W McMenamin; Rebecca G Deason; Vaughn R Steele; Wilma Koutstaal; Chad J Marsolek
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2014-12-18       Impact factor: 2.310

5.  Isolating shape from semantics in haptic-visual priming.

Authors:  Ana Pesquita; Allison A Brennan; James T Enns; Salvador Soto-Faraco
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-05-18       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Conflicting demands of abstract and specific visual object processing resolved by frontoparietal networks.

Authors:  Brenton W McMenamin; Chad J Marsolek; Brianna K Morseth; MacKenzie F Speer; Philip C Burton; E Darcy Burgund
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 3.282

7.  Invariant object recognition based on extended fragments.

Authors:  Evgeniy Bart; Jay Hegdé
Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci       Date:  2012-08-24       Impact factor: 2.380

8.  Intermediate, Wholistic Shape Representation in Object Recognition: A Pre-Attentive Stage of Processing?

Authors:  Jarrod Hollis; Glyn W Humphreys; Peter M Allen
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2021-12-23       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  How does literacy break mirror invariance in the visual system?

Authors:  Felipe Pegado; Kimihiro Nakamura; Thomas Hannagan
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-07-10

10.  Global attention facilitates the planning, but not execution of goal-directed reaches.

Authors:  J Daniel McCarthy; Joo-Hyun Song
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2016-07-01       Impact factor: 2.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.