Literature DB >> 24213935

Priming impossible figures in the object decision test: The critical importance of perceived stimulus complexity.

M Carrasco1, J G Seamon.   

Abstract

Previous research showed that object decision priming was found for possible, but not impossible, three-dimensional objects (e.g., Schacter, Cooper, & Delaney, 1990; Schacter, Cooper, Delaney, Peterson, & Tharan, 1991). We tested those objects and found that the impossible objects were subjectively more complex than the possible objects. We then constructed two sets of possible and impossible objects-one set that was equated for complexity, and one set that differed- for use in the object decision test. The results showed that when impossible objects were high in complexity and possible objects were low in complexity, priming was found only for possible objects; when possible and impossible objects were equated at a moderate level of complexity, priming was observed for both object types. These findings indicate that perceived object complexity, more than object possibility-impossibility, determined priming in the object decision test. The demonstration of object decision priming for possible and impossible objects calls for a reformulation of the structural description system explanation.

Year:  1996        PMID: 24213935     DOI: 10.3758/BF03210758

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


  18 in total

1.  Complexity, association value, and practice as factors in shape recognition following paired associates training.

Authors:  J M VANDERPLAS; E A GARVIN
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1959-03

2.  The psychophysics of form: reversible-perspective drawings of spatial objects.

Authors:  J HOCHBERG; V BROOKS
Journal:  Am J Psychol       Date:  1960-09

3.  Priming and recognition of transformed three-dimensional objects: effects of size and reflection.

Authors:  L A Cooper; D L Schacter; S Ballesteros; C Moore
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 3.051

4.  Implicit and explicit memory for novel visual objects in older and younger adults.

Authors:  D L Schacter; L A Cooper; M Valdiserri
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  1992-06

5.  Implicit memory for unfamiliar objects depends on access to structural descriptions.

Authors:  D L Schacter; L A Cooper; S M Delaney
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1990-03

6.  Complexity and structure in visual patterns.

Authors:  S F Chipman
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1977-09

7.  Bias in the priming of object decisions.

Authors:  R Ratcliff; G McKoon
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  Comments on Batchelder and Riefer's multinomial model for source monitoring.

Authors:  R A Kinchla
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  Memory for forms: common memory formats for verbal and visual stimulus presentations.

Authors:  G L Murphy; J W Hutchinson
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1982-01

10.  A standardized set of 260 pictures: norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity.

Authors:  J G Snodgrass; M Vanderwart
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Learn       Date:  1980-03
View more
  9 in total

1.  The influence of task requirements on priming in object decision and matching.

Authors:  T Liu; L A Cooper
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2001-09

2.  Sources of error in picture naming under time pressure.

Authors:  Toby J Lloyd-Jones; Mandy Nettlemill
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-06

3.  Neural correlates of language and non-language visuospatial processing in adolescents with reading disability.

Authors:  Joshua John Diehl; Stephen J Frost; Gordon Sherman; W Einar Mencl; Anish Kurian; Peter Molfese; Nicole Landi; Jonathan Preston; Anja Soldan; Robert K Fulbright; Jay G Rueckl; Mark S Seidenberg; Fumiko Hoeft; Kenneth R Pugh
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2014-07-24       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  The role of attention and study time in explicit and implicit memory for unfamiliar visual stimuli.

Authors:  D Ganor-Stern; J G Seamon; M Carrasco
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1998-11

5.  A mere exposure effect for transformed three-dimensional objects: effects of reflection, size, or color changes on affect and recognition.

Authors:  J G Seamon; D Ganor-Stern; M J Crowley; S M Wilson; W J Weber; C M O'Rourke; J K Mahoney
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1997-05

6.  Visual mental rotation of possible and impossible objects.

Authors:  I E Dror; C Ivey; C Rogus
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1997-06

7.  Effects of dividing attention during encoding on perceptual priming of unfamiliar visual objects.

Authors:  Anja Soldan; Jennifer A Mangels; Lynn A Cooper
Journal:  Memory       Date:  2008-09-26

8.  Bias effects in the possible/impossible object decision test with matching objects.

Authors:  Anja Soldan; H John Hilton; Yaakov Stern
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2009-03

9.  Drawing skill is related to the efficiency of encoding object structure.

Authors:  Florian Perdreau; Patrick Cavanagh
Journal:  Iperception       Date:  2014-05-06
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.