How young children and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) perceive objects in a 2D display: putting an assumption to the test

Abstract

Object recognition research is typically conducted using 2D stimuli in lieu of 3D objects. This study investigated the amount and complexity of knowledge gained from 2D stimuli in adult chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and young children (aged 3 and 4 years) using a titrated series of cross-dimensional search tasks. Results indicate that 3-year-old children utilize a response rule guided by local features to solve cross-dimensional tasks. Four-year-old toddlers and adult chimpanzees use information about object form and compositional structure from a 2D image to guide their search in three dimensions. Findings have specific implications to research conducted in object recognition/perception and broad relevance to all areas of research and daily living that incorporate 2D displays.

A Capuchin Monkey (Cebus apella) Uses Video to Find Food

“…For example, she might have needed immediate feedback between her actions and what happened on the screen. Alternatively, Carlotta might have profited from more realistic videos, for example, live videos like those used by Leighty et al [2008].…”

“…Poss and Rochat [2003] showed that chimpanzees do not depend on direct processing of perceptual information or stimulus enhancement to do so. Leighty et al [2008] further demonstrated that adult chimpanzees, like 4-year-old human children, process complex equivalences between objects and their 2-dimensional depictions: chimpanzees can use information about object forms and their compositional structures from video presentations to guide their search in real space.…”

“…Among other things, they showed that human infants learn from experience how to understand and use iconic representations [DeLoache, 2004] and that understanding iconic representations is fragile during early human childhood and depends on several factors, including the degree of physical similarity between objects and their representations [DeLoache et al, 1991]. Leighty et al [2008], using a similar paradigm, showed that human children at the age of 3 years establish an equivalence between objects and their video presentations in terms of similar features, whereas at the age of 4 years they start to operate in the complex equivalence mode.…”

“…It is quite unlikely that Ai confused the actual individuals with the line drawings. Leighty et al [2008] further proposed the subdivision of the equivalence mode into 2 submodes. The first consists of featural equivalence processing, in which a subject processes the 2-dimensional images as representations of 3-dimensional objects by relying on some common local features, for example shape or colour.…”

Stream/bounce perception and the effect of depth cues in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

“…Chimpanzees may not perceive such depth dimensions on the planar surface of a CRT monitor when explicit depth cues are not given via the objects, and their perceptual processing may interpret objects on the same surface as never passing through, due to physical laws. Although evidence suggests that chimpanzees are capable of correlating projected movies to the real world (e.g., Hirata, 2007;Leighty, Menzel, & Fragaszy, 2008;Menzel, Savage-Rumbaugh, & Lawson, 1985) and perceiving depth from some twodimensional pictorial cues (Imura & Tomonaga, 2003Imura, Tomonaga, & Yagi, 2008), we cannot be sure that they employed these abilities in viewing our stimulus displays without such cues. Given that two-dimensional iconic expressions of the three-dimensional world are a human-specific innovation and that human and chimpanzee subjects differed enormously in previous exposure to such media, species differences in responding to such computerised graphical images would not be surprising.…”