No within-object advantage for detection of rotation

Bertamini, Marco; Friedenberg, Jay; Argyle, Laurence

doi:10.1016/s0001-6918(02)00043-4

Cited by 27 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The novel finding in the current work was that grouping modulated the magnitude of the implicit preference: more specifically, reflection preference was significantly greater when the contours were closed to form a single object than when they were part of two spatially separated objects. Some previous studies have found that reflection is more fluently processed than translation within a single object, but that this difference is attenuated or sometimes reversed in two-object conditions (Baylis & Driver, 1995; Bertamini, 2010; Bertamini et al, 2002; Bertamini et al, 1997; Koning & Wagemans, 2009; Treder & van der Helm, 2007). The fact that the same visual factors affect preference scores highlights the close relationship between perceptual salience and preference.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…One possibility is that translation is discovered through a lock and key matching process, akin to mental object rotation, where translated contours are mentally shifted until they overlap (Baylis & Driver, 1995; Bertamini et al, 1997)? Some participants report consciously using the lock and key strategy, although in a study that looked at this the awareness of this strategy was not linked to better performance (Bertamini et al, 2002). However, there are problems with the lock and key hypothesis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This feature may make the translation regularity more difficult to detect. However, the disadvantage is attenuated when the translation spans two objects (Bertamini et al, 2002). The relative strength of these factors and their interactions remain unresolved (Bertamini, 2010), but what is crucial for the current study is that whatever accounts for detection speed differences also accounts for implicit preferences.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This within-object advantage does not hold for translation, and some studies have reported that translation is more rapidly detected when the translated contours form part of two separate objects (Figure 1b and d). This pattern of results is usually formalized as an interaction between regularity type (reflection, translation) and number of objects (one, two), and the cause of this interaction has been explored in several recent papers (Bertamini, 2010; Bertamini, Friedenberg, & Argyle, 2002; Friedenberg & Bertamini, 2000; Koning & Wagemans, 2009; Treder & van der Helm, 2007). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Grouping by Closure Influences Subjective Regularity and Implicit Preference

2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A reflection between a pair of contours is more rapidly detected than a translation, but this effect is stronger when the contours are closed to form a single object compared to when they are closed to form 2 objects with a gap between them. That is, grouping changes the relative salience of different regularities. We tested whether this manipulation would also change preference for reflection or translation. We measured preference for these patterns using the Implicit Association Test (IAT). On some trials, participants saw words that were either positive or negative and had to classify them as quickly as possible. On interleaved trials, they saw reflection or translation patterns and again had to classify them. Participants were faster when 1 button was used for reflection and positive words and another button was used for translation and negative words, compared to when the reverse response mapping was used (translation and positive vs. reflection and negative). This reaction time difference indicates an implicit preference for reflection over translation. However, the size of the implicit preference was significantly reduced in the Two-objects condition. We concluded that factors that affect perceptual sensitivity also systematically affect implicit preference formation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Grouping by Closure Influences Subjective Regularity and Implicit Preference

2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although it seems intuitively appealing that convexities are matched with concavities when translation is present in two facing objects (like the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle), evidence using parts that are too complex to fit after a simple translation in the plane (Bertamini, Friedenberg, & Kubovy, 1997;Friedenberg & Bertamini, 2000) or similar findings for translation and for rotation within a single object (Bertamini, Friedenberg, & Argyle, 2002) make the jigsaw explanation less satisfactory. Treder and van der Helm (2007) used stereograms to place the corresponding parts of the object on the same or on different planes.…”

Section: Are Convexities Perceived As "Parts"?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Processing convexity and concavity along a 2-D contour: figure–ground, structural shape, and attention

Bertamini

Wagemans

2012

Psychon Bull Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interest in convexity has a long history in vision science. For smooth contours in an image, it is possible to code regions of positive (convex) and negative (concave) curvature, and this provides useful information about solid shape. We review a large body of evidence on the role of this information in perception of shape and in attention. This includes evidence from behavioral, neurophysiological, imaging, and developmental studies. A review is necessary to analyze the evidence on how convexity affects (1) separation between figure and ground, (2) part structure, and (3) attention allocation. Despite some broad agreement on the importance of convexity in these areas, there is a lack of consensus on the interpretation of specific claims-for example, on the contribution of convexity to metric depth and on the automatic directing of attention to convexities or to concavities. The focus is on convexity and concavity along a 2-D contour, not convexity and concavity in 3-D, but the important link between the two is discussed. We conclude that there is good evidence for the role of convexity information in figure-ground organization and in parsing, but other, more specific claims are not (yet) well supported.

show abstract

Mental rotation depends on the number of objects rather than on the number of image fragments

Koning

Lier

2004

Acta Psychologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

No within-object advantage for detection of rotation

Cited by 27 publications

References 28 publications

Grouping by Closure Influences Subjective Regularity and Implicit Preference

Grouping by Closure Influences Subjective Regularity and Implicit Preference

Processing convexity and concavity along a 2-D contour: figure–ground, structural shape, and attention

Mental rotation depends on the number of objects rather than on the number of image fragments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About