Unit Formation in Perception and Memory

Ceraso, John

doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60527-7

Cited by 35 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…integrated into one single configuration (Ceraso, 1985). Generally, unitized associations are embedded within an entity defining framework and are therefore perceived as one single whole (Mecklinger & Jäger, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is a novel conceptual unit more than the sum of its parts?: FMRI evidence from an associative recognition memory study

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Units feature emergent properties, i.e. properties which cannot be directly inferred from the properties of their constituents (Ceraso, 1985;Graf & Schacter, 1989). For instance, the symmetry of a face cannot be predicted by the properties of the different face parts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is a novel conceptual unit more than the sum of its parts?: FMRI evidence from an associative recognition memory study

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic features is not new, however; it was put forth already by Solomon Asch and John Ceraso as early as 1960 (Asch, Ceraso, & Heimer, 1960;Ceraso, 1985Ceraso, , 1990; see also Garner, 1974).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Color and context: An ERP study on intrinsic and extrinsic feature binding in episodic memory

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Element spatial separation, and to a lesser degree perceptuallimitations, determined compound performance. These results question our lab's previous evidence for configural compound processing by pigeons (Lamb, 1988; Lamb & Riley, 1981).They suggest instead that pigeons independently and separately process the individual elements of color/line-orientation compounds, with element separation determining the distribution of processing between the elements.Research on humans has shown that the organization of the elements fonning a compound visual stimulus strongly influences its psychological properties (Ceraso, 1985; Gamer, 1974 Gamer, , 1976. Riley and Leith (1976) similarly proposed that element organization may also influence how pigeons process compound stimuli.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research on humans has shown that the organization of the elements fonning a compound visual stimulus strongly influences its psychological properties (Ceraso, 1985; Gamer, 1974 Gamer, , 1976. Riley and Leith (1976) similarly proposed that element organization may also influence how pigeons process compound stimuli.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial and configural factors in compound stimulus processing by pigeons

Cook

Riley

Brown

1992

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three matching-to-sample experiments examined whether spatial or configural factors determined how the element arrangement of compound sample stimuli influenced matehing accuracy in pigeons. Seven types of compound stimuli were tested. The arrangement of color and lineorientation elements in these compounds varied in terms of the spatial separation between the elements, the degree ofconsistency in element spatiallocation, and the number ofbounded areas containing the elements. Matching accuracy was examined upon initial exposure to the compounds, during asymptotic conditions of shared attention, and with variation of sample durations ranging from .04 to 5.935 sec. In all three experiments, when spatial proximity, locational certainty, and the number of lines were precisely controlled or equated, no evidence for the proposed configural processing of"unified" compounds was found (Lamb & Riley, 1981). Element spatial separation, and to a lesser degree perceptuallimitations, determined compound performance. These results question our lab's previous evidence for configural compound processing by pigeons (Lamb, 1988; Lamb & Riley, 1981).They suggest instead that pigeons independently and separately process the individual elements of color/line-orientation compounds, with element separation determining the distribution of processing between the elements.Research on humans has shown that the organization of the elements fonning a compound visual stimulus strongly influences its psychological properties (Ceraso, 1985; Gamer, 1974 Gamer, , 1976. Riley and Leith (1976) similarly proposed that element organization may also influence how pigeons process compound stimuli. Since then, two reports from our lab (Lamb, 1988; Lamb & Riley, 1981) have offered evidence in support of this proposal, obtained in variations of the element/compound delayed matchingto-sample (E/C DMTS) task.In the E/C DMTS task, the pigeon is presented with either an element sample, consisting of one of two color elements (red or green, henceforth R or G) or one oftwo line-orientation elements (vertical or horizontal, henceforth V or H), or a compound sample, consisting ofboth acolor and a lineelement (RH, RV, GH, GV). The sample is followed by a test in which the two values of a single dimension are pitted against one another (R vs. Gor

show abstract

Unit Formation in Perception and Memory

Cited by 35 publications

References 23 publications

Is a novel conceptual unit more than the sum of its parts?: FMRI evidence from an associative recognition memory study

Is a novel conceptual unit more than the sum of its parts?: FMRI evidence from an associative recognition memory study

Color and context: An ERP study on intrinsic and extrinsic feature binding in episodic memory

Spatial and configural factors in compound stimulus processing by pigeons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About