Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyHow do we recognize objects despite differences in their retinal projections when they are seen at different orientations? Marr and Nishihara (1978) proposed that shapes are represented in memory as structural descriptions in objectc Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 entered coordinate systems, so that an object is represented identically regardless of its orientation. An alternative hypothesis is that an object isMental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
represented in memory in a single representation corresponding to a canonical orientation, and a mental rotation operation transforms an input shape COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 ing to a different orientation. In four experiments, subjects studied several objects each at a single orientation, and were given extensive practice at naming them quickly, or at classifying them as normal or mirror-reversed, at several orientations. At first, response times increased with departur Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 e from the study orientation, with a slope similar to those obtained in classic mental rotation experiments. This suggests that subjects made both judMental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
gments by mentally transforming the orientation of the input shape to the one they had initially studied. With practice, subjects recognized the objecCOGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 onse times for these probes increased with increasing disparity from the previously trained orientations. This indicates that subjects had stored representations of the shapes at each of the practice orientations and recognized shapes at the new orientations by rotating them to one of the stored ori Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 entations. The results are consistent w ith a hybrid of the second (mental transformation) and third (multiple view) hypotheses of shape recognition:Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
input shapes arc transformed to a stored view, either the one at the nearest orientation or one ar a canonical orientation. Interestingly, when mirrorCOGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 ntation can take the shortest path of rotation that will align an input shape and its memorized counterpart, in this case a rotation in depth about an axis in the picture plane, c 1989 Academic Press. Inc.The first author was supported by a NSF Graduate Fellowship and a James R. Killian Fellowship. Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 This research was supported by NSF Grant BNS 8518774, and by a grant from the Alfred p. Sloan Foundation to the MIT Center for Cognitive Science. We tMental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
hank Jigna Desai, Anthony Fodor. Bret Harsham, Joseph Loebach, and Dennis Vidach for their help in conducting the research; David Plotkin, Doug WittinCOGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 Michael Corballis, Shimon Ullman, Larry Parsons, and an anonymous reviewer for their comments. Requests for reprints should be sent to Michael J . Tarr at E10-106, MIT, Cambridge. MA 02139.2330010-0285/89 $7.50Copyright © 1989 by Academic Hress. IncAU rights ot reproduction in any form reserved.234T Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 ARR AND PINKERHow do we recognize an object despite the differences in its retinal projections when it is seen at different orientations, sizes, and pMental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
ositions? Clearly we must compare what wc sec with what wc remember in a way that neutralizes the effects of our viewing position, but this can be reaCOGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 stored memory representations used for recognition, and different kinds of processes used to find a match between the input and the stored representations.Theories of shape recognition fall into three families (sec Pinker, 1984, for a review). First, there are viewpoint-independent models, in which Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 an object is assigned the same representation regardless of its size, orientation, or location. This class includes feature models, in which objectsMental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
are represented as collections of spatially independent features such as intersections, angles, and curves, and structural-description models, in whicCOGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 d on the object or a part of the object. Prior to describing an input shape, a coordinate system is centered on it, based on its axis of elongation or symmetry, and the resulting “object-centered” description can be compared directly with stored shape descriptions, which use the same coordinate syst Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 em (e.g., Marr & Nishihara, 1978; Palmer, 1975). Second, there are single-view-plus-transformation models, in which an object is represented in a singMental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
le orientation, usually one determined by the perspective of the viewer (a “viewer-centered” representation). In these models recognition is achieved COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 the memory representations are stored, or to transform memory representations into the orientation of the input shape. Third, there are multiple-view models in which an object is represented in a set of representations, each committed to a different familiar orientation, and an object is recognized Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 if it matches any of them. There are also hybrid models. One combination that remedies some of the limitations of the single-view-plus-transformationMental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
and multiple-view models combines aspects of each. Objects arc represented in a small number of viewpoint-specific representations, and an observed obCOGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 e effect of orientation on the amount of time required for the recognition of an object. The viewpoint-independent models predict that the recognition time for a particular object will be invariant across all orientations (assuming that the time to assign a coordinate system to an input shape at dif Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 ferent orientations is controlled). The multiple-views model makes aSHAPE RECOGNITION235similar prediction. In contrast, the single-view-plus-transforMental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
mation model, if it uses an incremental transformation process, predicts that recognition time will be monotonically dependent on the orientation diffCOGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 tion time will vary with orientation, but that recognition time will be monotonically dependent on the orientation difference between the observed object and the nearest of several stored representations. It is also possible, under the hybrid model, that one or more orientations have a “canonical” s Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 tatus (Palmer, Rosch, & Chase, 1981), such as the upright orientation, and that under some circumstances an input shape may be rotated into correspondMental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
ence with the canonical view even if other stored views are nearer. If so, recognition times would exhibit two components, one dependent on the orientCOGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 arest stored orientation.PREVIOUS STUDIES OF THE RECOGNITION OF SHAPES AT DIFFERENT ORIENTATIONSEvidence for a Mental Rotation TransformationCooper and Shepard (1973) and Metzler and Shepard (1974) found several converging kinds of evidence suggesting the existence of an incremental or analog transf Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 ormation process, which they called “mental rotation.” First, when subjects discriminated standard from mirror-reversed shapes at a variety of orientaMental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
tions, they took monotonically longer for shapes that were further from the upright. Second, when subjects were given information about the orientatioCOGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 21. 233—282 (1989)Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape RecognitionMichael J. Tarr and Steven PinkerDepartment of B Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 imulus appeared, the time they took to discriminate its handedness was relatively invariant across absolute orientations. Third, when subjects were told to rotate a shape mentally and a probe stimulus was presented at a time and orientation that should have matched the instantaneous orientation of t Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1 heir changing image, the time they took to discriminate the handedness of the probe was relatively insensitive to its absolute orientation. Fourth, whMental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition 1
en subjects were given extensive practice at rotating shapes in a given direction and then were presented with new orientations a bit past 180° in thaGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook