Seeing things from a different angle: The pigeon's recognition of single geons rotated in depth

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 115-132

  Peissig, Jessie J ^a,c   Young, Michael E ^a   Wasserman, Edward A ^a,c   Biederman, Irving ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c E11 SSH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; DEPTH PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; PHYSIOLOGY; PIGEONS AND DOVES; RANDOMIZATION; ROTATION; VISION; VISUAL FIELD;

ANIMALS; COLUMBIDAE; DEPTH PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; RANDOM ALLOCATION; ROTATION; VISUAL FIELDS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0034168624     PISSN: 00977403     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0097-7403.26.2.115     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94, 115-147.
2. Biederman, I., & Gerhardstein, P. C. (1993). Recognizing depth-rotated objects: Evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 1162-1182.
3. Cerella, J. (1977). Absence of perspective processing in the pigeon. Pattern Recognition, 9, 65-68.
4. Cook, R. G., & Katz, J. S. (1999). Dynamic object perception by pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 25, 194-210.
5. Corballis, M. C. (1988). Recognition of disoriented shapes. Psychological Review, 95, 115-123.
6. Delius, J. D. (1992). Categorical discrimination of objects and pictures by pigeons. Animal Learning and Behavior, 20, 301-311.
7. Edelman, S., & Bülthoff, H. H. (1992). Orientation dependence in the recognition of familiar and novel view of three-dimensional objects. Vision Research, 32, 2385-2400.
8. Gross, C. G., Bender, D. G., & Rocha-Miranda, C. E. (1972). Visual properties of neurons in inferotemporal cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 35, 96-111.
9. Hayward, W. G., & Tarr, M. J. (1997). Testing conditions for viewpoint invariance in object recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 1511-1521.
10. Jolicoeur, P. (1990). Identification of disoriented objects: a dual-systems theory. Mind and Language, 5, 386-410.
11. Kirkpatrick-Steger, K., & Wasserman, E. A. (1996). The what and where of the pigeon's processing of complex visual stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 22, 60-67.
12. Logothetis, N. K., Pauls, J., & Poggio, T. (1995). Shape representation in the inferior temporal cortex of monkeys. Current Biology, 5, 552-563.
13. Lumsden, E. A. (1977). Generalizations of an operant response to photographs and drawings/silhouettes of a three-dimensional object at various viewpoints. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 10, 405-407.
14. Marr, D., & Nishihara, H. K. (1978). Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 200, 269-294.
15. Peissig, J. J., Young, M. E., Wasserman, E. A., & Biederman, I. (1999). The pigeon's perception of depth-rotated shapes. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 18, 657-690.
16. Poggio, T., & Edelman, S. (1990). A network that learns to recognize three-dimensional objects. Nature, 18, 263-266.
17. Reid, S. L., & Spetch, M. L. (1998). Perception of pictorial depth cues by pigeons. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5, 698-704.
18. Rock, I., & DiVita, J. (1987). A case of viewer-centered perception. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 280-293.
19. Stankiewicz, B. J., Hummel, J. E., & Cooper, E. E. (1998). The role of attention in priming for left-right reflections of object images: Evidence for a dual representation of object shape. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 732-744.
20. Tanaka, K. (1996). Inferotemporal cortex and object vision. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 19, 109-139.
21. Tarr, M. J. (1995). Rotating objects to recognize them: A case study on the role of viewpoint dependency in the recognition of three-dimensional objects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 55-82.
22. Tarr, M. J., & Bülthoff, H. H. (1995). Is human object recognition better described by geon structural descriptions or multiple views? Comment on Biederman and Gerhardstein (1993). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 1494-1505.
23. Tarr, M. J., Bülthoff, H. H., Zabinski, M., & Blanz, V. (1997). To what extent do unique parts influence recognition across changes in viewpoint? Psychological Science, 8, 282-289.
24. Tarr, M. J., & Pinker, S. (1989). Mental rotation and orientation-dependence in shape recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 233-282.
25. Tarr, M. J., Williams, P., Hayward, W. G., & Gauthier, I. (1998). Three-dimensional object recognition is viewpoint dependent. Nature Neuroscience, 1, 275-277.
26. Ullman, S. (1989). Aligning pictorial descriptions: An approach to object recognition. Cognition, 32, 193-253.
27. Vetter, T., Huribert, A., & Poggio, T. (1995). View-based models of 3D object recognition: Invariance to imaging transformations. Cerebral Cortex, 3, 261-269.
28. Van Hamme, L. J., Wasserman, E. A., & Biederman, I. (1992). Discrimination of contour-deleted images by pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 18, 387-399.
29. Wasserman, E. A., Gagliardi, J. L., Cook, B. R., Kirkpatrick-Steger, K., Astley, S. L., & Biederman, I. (1996). The pigeon's recognition of drawings of depth-rotated objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 22, 205-221.
30. Wasserman, E. A., Kirkpatrick-Steger, K., Van Hamme, L. J., & Biederman, I. (1993). Pigeons are sensitive to the spatial organization of complex visual stimuli. Psychological Science, 4, 336-341.