A Computational Theory of the Mental Imagery Medium

Pinker, Steven

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-1391-2_2

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Computational models of mental spatial image transformations are sorely needed. A small number of models of object-based transformations have been proposed (Funt, 1983;Just and Carpenter, 1985;Pinker, 1988), but this effort has languished in recent years. We believe the time is ripe to return to this problem with current computational techniques and neurophysiological data in hand.…”

Section: Directions For Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transformations of Visuospatial Images

Zacks¹,

Michelon

2005

Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews

218

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transformations of visuospatial mental imagesHere are some simple instructions: "Close your eyes.Imagine you are standing in front of a pedestal facing a bust of William James. Imagine now that you have walked around the pedestal and are now viewing the bust from the side. Now, imagine that a motor is turning the bust, allowing you to view it from a range of angles. Finally, imagine that you reach out, pick up the bust, and turn it upside-down to look at the bottom."Most people report that they can follow such instructions, and doing so often results in phenomenal experiences that are vivid and faithful to reality-though the degree that this is the case varies among individuals (Isaac and Marks, 1994). The experiences evoked by instructions such as these are transformations of visuospatial images. They may not require explicit intentions to produce: Humans and other animals appear to construct and transform visuospatial representations to solve a range of everyday reasoning problems, including navigation, the making and using of tools, and construction. But what is the computational and neurophysiological nature of the representations involved? How are those representations transformed during explicit and implicit visuospatial imagery?There is now a body of theory and evidence speaking to each of these questions. The goals of this article are, first, to introduce a framework for thinking about visuospatial image transformations, and, second, to interpret the available data within that framework to provide current best answers to both questions. To do so, we first provide an overview of the phenomena constituting visuospatial imagery and then describe a framework for relating image transformations to the representations on which they operate. The rest of the article characterizes different types of image transformations and the relations among them. The article's major empirical claim is that two sorts of visuospatial transformations can be dissociated: transformations in which the representations of individual objects are updated relative to other spatial representations and transformations in which one's personal perspective is updated. These visuospatial transformations are characterized by different patterns of behavioral performance, different neural correlates, and different psychometric properties. 96Authors' Note: We would like to thank Ty Fagan for his assistance with the meta-analysis. We also thank Sarah Creem-Regehr, Nora Newcombe, Amy Shelton, Barbara Tversky, and Maryjane Wraga, whose thoughtful comments were extremely helpful in revising the article. The research of our laboratory described here was supported in part by the McDonnell Center for Higher Brain Function.

show abstract

Section: Directions For Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transformations of Visuospatial Images

Zacks¹,

Michelon

2005

Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews

218

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Shepard and Metzler ( 1971 ) were the first to interpret similar slopes for rotation in depth and in the picture plane to indicate that latency was a function of the angle of rotation in three dimensions, not two, as in a retinal projection (for additional discussion see Pinker, 1988 ). In order to investigate this further, Parsons ( 1987 ) conducted an extensive experimental study examining the rates of imagined rotation not only around three principal axes of the observer’s reference frame, but also around diagonal axes lying within one of the principal planes (frontal, midsagittal, or horizontal) and around “skew” axes not lying in any of the principal planes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Immersivity: Image Generation and Transformation Processes in 3D Immersive Environments

Kozhevnikov¹,

Dhond²

2012

Front. Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most research on three-dimensional (3D) visual-spatial processing has been conducted using traditional non-immersive 2D displays. Here we investigated how individuals generate and transform mental images within 3D immersive (3DI) virtual environments, in which the viewers perceive themselves as being surrounded by a 3D world. In Experiment 1, we compared participants’ performance on the Shepard and Metzler (1971) mental rotation (MR) task across the following three types of visual presentation environments; traditional 2D non-immersive (2DNI), 3D non-immersive (3DNI – anaglyphic glasses), and 3DI (head mounted display with position and head orientation tracking). In Experiment 2, we examined how the use of different backgrounds affected MR processes within the 3DI environment. In Experiment 3, we compared electroencephalogram data recorded while participants were mentally rotating visual-spatial images presented in 3DI vs. 2DNI environments. Overall, the findings of the three experiments suggest that visual-spatial processing is different in immersive and non-immersive environments, and that immersive environments may require different image encoding and transformation strategies than the two other non-immersive environments. Specifically, in a non-immersive environment, participants may utilize a scene-based frame of reference and allocentric encoding whereas immersive environments may encourage the use of a viewer-centered frame of reference and egocentric encoding. These findings also suggest that MR performed in laboratory conditions using a traditional 2D computer screen may not reflect spatial processing as it would occur in the real world.

show abstract

“…First, we treat images as inherently three dimensional,, although two-dimensional images can be handled as special cases. As pointed out by Pinker (1988), images must be represented and manipulated as patterns in three dimensions, which can be accessed using either an object-centered or a world-centered coordinate system. Second, we consider two working-memory representations, corresponding to the visual and spatial components of mental imagery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is reinforced by the experiments carried out by Kosslyn (1980) and his colleagues, who concluded that images preserve the spatial relationships, relative sizes, and relative distances of real physical objects. Pinker (1988) suggested that image scanning can be performed in two-and three-dimensional space, providing support for Kosslyn's proposal that mental images capture the spatial characteristics of an actual display. Pinker also indicated that images can be accessed using either an object-centered or a world-centered coordinate system.…”

Section: Research F'indings In Mental Imagerymentioning

confidence: 92%

Computational Imagery

Glasgow

Papadias

1992

Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After many years of neglect, the topic of mental imagery has recently emerged as an active area of research and debate in the cognitive science community. This article proposes a concept of computational imagery, which has potential applications to problems whose solutions by humans involve the use of mental imagery. Computational imagery can be defined as the ability to represent, retrieve, and reason about spatial and visual information not explicitly stored in long‐term memory. The article proposes a knowledge representation scheme for computational imagery that incorporates three representations: a long‐term memory, descriptive representation and two working‐memory representations, corresponding to the distinct visual and spatial components of mental imagery. The three representations, and a set of primitive functions, are specified using a formal theory of arrays and implemented in the array‐based language Nial. Although results of studies in mental imagery provide initial motivation for the representations and functionality of the scheme, our ultimate concerns are expressive power, inferential adequacy, and efficiency.

show abstract

A Computational Theory of the Mental Imagery Medium

Cited by 9 publications

References 14 publications

Transformations of Visuospatial Images

Transformations of Visuospatial Images

Understanding Immersivity: Image Generation and Transformation Processes in 3D Immersive Environments

Computational Imagery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About