Literature DB >> 6223974

Generating visual images: units and relations.

S M Kosslyn, B J Reiser, M J Farah, S L Fliegel.   

Abstract

Three major conclusions were drawn from the results of the experiments reported in this article: First, mental images may be constructed by amalgamating images of individual parts, and an increment of time is required to add each additional part to an image. This was true when "parts" were defined by the Gestalt laws of proximity, continuity, or similarity, when parts of objects were presented on separate pages initially and the subject mentally "glued" them together into a single image, and when the number of parts was varied by altering the way an ambiguous geometric form was described. Second, descriptive information can be used in constructing images. Subjects were able to image scenes in accordance with descriptions that specified the relative distances between component objects of the scene. More time was required to form images of scenes containing more objects, and more time was later required to scan between two imaged objects if they were mentally pictured at greater distances. Third, the ease of imaging a unit depends on how much material is included in each unit and on how difficult it is to locate where the unit should be placed relative to the existing portions of an image. This conclusion was supported by the finding that subjects require less time to image arrays composed of units containing fewer letters and require less time if arrays are composed of relatively discriminable letters than if arrays are composed of relatively indiscriminable letters. Finally, in two of the experiments nonimagery control groups were tested to demonstrate that generating an image is not the same as simply retrieving memorized verbal information or reviewing information in some more abstract format.

Mesh:

Year:  1983        PMID: 6223974     DOI: 10.1037//0096-3445.112.2.278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  17 in total

1.  Generating visual mental images: latency and vividness are inversely related.

Authors:  Amedeo D'Angiulli; Adam Reeves
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2002-12

2.  Process generalization and the prediction of performance on mental imagery tasks.

Authors:  B Wallace; B G Hofelich
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1992-11

3.  Perceptual simulation in property verification.

Authors:  Karen Olseth Solomon; Lawrence W Barsalou
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2004-03

4.  Mental images can be ambiguous: reconstruals and reference-frame reversals.

Authors:  M A Peterson; J F Kihlstrom; P M Rose; M L Glisky
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1992-03

5.  Non-algorithmic access to calendar information in a calendar calculator with autism.

Authors:  L Mottron; K Lemmens; L Gagnon; X Seron
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2006-02

6.  Comparison processes on visual mental images.

Authors:  S Bagnara; F Simion; M E Tagliabue; C Umiltà
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1988-03

7.  Memory confusions for real and imagined completions of symmetrical visual patterns.

Authors:  R A Finke; M K Johnson; G C Shyi
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1988-03

8.  Explorations of creative visual synthesis in mental imagery.

Authors:  R A Finke; K Slayton
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1988-05

9.  Further constraints on the bizarreness effect: elaboration at encoding.

Authors:  B Robinson-Riegler; M A McDaniel
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1994-11

10.  Mental extrapolation in patterns constructed from memory.

Authors:  S Pinker; P A Choate; R A Finke
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1984-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.