Viewpoint dependency in the recognition of dynamic scenes.

Garsoffky, Bärbel; Schwan, Stephan; Hesse, Friedrich W.

doi:10.1037/0278-7393.28.6.1035

Cited by 36 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For dynamic movie sequences, the ability to encode information across viewpoints is unclear. Garsoffky et al [70] found recognition accuracy to be higher when scene memory was tested using the same viewpoint as experienced by the viewer when watching a movie sequence than when the viewpoint at test did not match that at encoding. This result is consistent with a viewpoint-dependent representation.…”

Section: Spatial Memory During Active Tasks Requiring Movementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vision and the representation of the surroundings in spatial memory

Tatler

Land

2011

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the paradoxes of vision is that the world as it appears to us and the image on the retina at any moment are not much like each other. The visual world seems to be extensive and continuous across time. However, the manner in which we sample the visual environment is neither extensive nor continuous. How does the brain reconcile these differences? Here, we consider existing evidence from both static and dynamic viewing paradigms together with the logical requirements of any representational scheme that would be able to support active behaviour. While static scene viewing paradigms favour extensive, but perhaps abstracted, memory representations, dynamic settings suggest sparser and task-selective representation. We suggest that in dynamic settings where movement within extended environments is required to complete a task, the combination of visual input, egocentric and allocentric representations work together to allow efficient behaviour. The egocentric model serves as a coding scheme in which actions can be planned, but also offers a potential means of providing the perceptual stability that we experience.

show abstract

Section: Spatial Memory During Active Tasks Requiring Movementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vision and the representation of the surroundings in spatial memory

Tatler

Land

2011

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They correspond better to the restrictions of the human visual apparatus. Analogously, several studies have shown that humans encode spatial information from the point of view they encounter it [e.g., 3,6,11,23].…”

Section: Space Syntax Isovists and Visibility Graphsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Isovists via Mental Representations to Behaviour: First Steps toward Closing the Causal Chain

Meilinger

Franz

Bülthoff

2012

Environ Plann B Plann Des

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This study addresses the interrelations between human wayfinding performance, the mental representation of routes, and the geometrical layout of path intersections. The virtual reality based empirical experiment consisted of a route learning and reproduction task and two choice reaction tasks measuring the acquired knowledge of route decision points. In order to relate the recorded behavioural data to the geometry of the environment, a specific adaptation of isovist-based spatial analysis was developed that accounts for directional bias in human spatial perception and representation. Taken together, the applied analyses provided conclusive evidence for correspondences between geometrical properties of environments as captured by isovists and their mental representation.

show abstract

“…A related question concerns how movement itself is remembered: How far do people remember the perceptual details of object motion, and how far do they rely on the "gist" of the action? Finally, some previous studies have examined the effects of movement on the extraction of spatial layout (e.g., Garsoffky, Schwan, & Hesse, 2002;Garsoffky, Schwan, & Huff, 2009;Munger et al, 2006), and it will be important to integrate these results with work on recognition of individual scene components.…”

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the memory advantage for moving scenes

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recognition memory is better for moving images than for static images (the dynamic superiority effect), and performance is best when the mode of presentation at test matches that at study (the study-test congruence effect). We investigated the basis for these effects. In Experiment 1, dividing attention during encoding reduced overall performance but had little effect on the dynamic superiority or study-test congruence effects. In addition, these effects were not limited to scenes depicting faces. In Experiment 2, movement improved both old-new recognition and scene orientation judgments. In Experiment 3, movement improved the recognition of studied scenes but also increased the spurious recognition of novel scenes depicting the same people as studied scenes, suggesting that movement improves the identification of individual objects or actors without necessarily improving the retrieval of associated information. We discuss the theoretical implications of these results and highlight directions for future investigation. Memory for moving scenes 2 Exploring the memory advantage for moving scenesThe visual world is intrinsically dynamic and our visual and mnemonic systems have developed to encode and retrieve information about a moving environment (Gibson, 1979). In recent years there has been a surge of interest in the effects of movement on memory for faces (Knight & Johnston, 1997;Lander & Bruce, 2003;Lander & Chuang, 2005;O'Toole, Roark, & Abdi, 2002;Pike, Kemp, Towell, & Phillips, 1997) and objects (Balas & Sinha, 2009;Koban & Cook, 2009;Stone, 1998Stone, , 1999Vuong & Tarr, 2004). These studies have shown that dynamic information can be stored in long-term memory; people encode the temporal sequence of views of a moving stimulusits "spatiotemporal signature" -so that the information extracted from dynamic stimuli is more than just a set of static views, particularly when the motion is non-rigid (Knight & Johnston, 1997;Lander & Chuang, 2005;Stone, 1999).To date, there has been surprisingly little research on memory for moving scenes -natural images depicting complex agglomerations of objects and people. In an early study, Goldstein, Chance, Hoisington, and Buescher (1982) had participants study film clips or still images taken from those clips, and administered a recognition memory test a few minutes later. They reported a dynamic superiority effect: Recognition was better for moving images than for static images, although Goldstein et al.'s comparison was not well controlled as the durations of moving and static stimuli were not equal. More recently, Matthews, Benjamin, and Osborne (2007) presented participants with moving and static scenes of equal duration drawn from a wide variety of sources, and tested recognition memory at intervals ranging from 3 days to 1 month. Recognition of moving scenes was better than that of static scenes, and this moving advantage was independent of chromaticity. Matthews et al. also examined performance in a "multistatic" condition in which single frames drawn from regu...

show abstract

Viewpoint dependency in the recognition of dynamic scenes.

Cited by 36 publications

References 43 publications

Vision and the representation of the surroundings in spatial memory

Vision and the representation of the surroundings in spatial memory

From Isovists via Mental Representations to Behaviour: First Steps toward Closing the Causal Chain

Exploring the memory advantage for moving scenes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About