Estimating the efficiency of recognizing gender and affect from biological motion

Vision Research

Volumn 42, Issue 20, 2002, Pages 2345-2355

  Pollick, Frank E ^a   Lestou, Vaia ^a   Ryu, Jungwon ^b   Cho, Sung Bae ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^b Yonsei University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANGER; ARM MOVEMENT; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; ASSOCIATION; BIOMECHANICS; CLASSIFICATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA BASE; FEMALE; GENDER; HUMAN; KINEMATICS; LIGHT; MALE; MODEL; NORMAL HUMAN; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

AFFECT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARM; BIOMECHANICS; CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOTION PERCEPTION; MOVEMENT; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SOCIAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0036753585     PISSN: 00426989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00196-7     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Barclay C.D., Cutting J.E., Kozlowski L.T. Temporal and spatial factors in gait perception that influence gender recognition. Perception & Psychophysics. 23:1978;145-152.
2. Barlow H.B. The efficiency of detecting changes in random dot patterns. Vision Research. 18:1978;637-650.
3. Beale H.D. Neural Network Design. 1996;PWS Publish Company.
4. Beardsworth T., Buckner T. The ability to recognize oneself from a video recording of one's movements without seeing one's body. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society. 18:1981;19-22.
5. Bingham G.P. Kinematic form and scaling: Further investigations on the visual perception of lifted weight. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 13:1987;155-177.
6. Bowden, R. (2000). Learning statistical models of human motion. In IEEE Workshop on Human Modelling, Analysis and Synthesis, CVPR 2000
7. Cutting E.J. Generation of synthetic male and female walkers through manipulation of a biomechanical invariant. Perception. 7:1978;393-405.
8. Cutting J.E., Kozlowski L.T. Recognizing friends by their walk: Gait perception without familiarity cues. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society. 9:1977;353-356.
9. Dittrich W.H. Action categories and the perception of biological motion. Perception. 22:1991;15-22.
10. Dittrich W.H., Troscianko T., Lea S.E.G., Morgan D. Perception of emotion from dynamic point-light displays represented in dance. Perception. 25:1996;727-738.
11. Faraway, J. (2000). Human Animation Using Nonparametric Regression. Technical Report #382, Department of Statistics, University of Michigan.
12. Geary D.C. Male, Female the Evolution of Human Sex Differences. 1998;American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
13. Giese M.A. Hierarchical neural model for the recognition of biological motion. Journal of Vision. 1(3):2001;. abstract 356.
14. Grezes J., Fonlupt P., Bertenthal B., Delon-Martin C., Segebarth C., Decety J. Does perception of biological motion rely on specific brain regions? Neuroimage. 13(5):2001;775-785.
15. Grossman E., Donnelly M., Price R., Pickens D., Morgan V., Neighbor G., Blake R. Brain areas involved in perception of biological motion. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 12(5):2000;711-720.
16. Haykin S. Neural Networks. 2nd Ed. 1999;Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
17. Hill H., Pollick F.E. Exaggerating temporal differences enhances recognition of individuals from point light displays. Psychological Science. 11:2000;223-228.
18. Hoenkamp E. Perceptual cues that determine the labeling of human gait. Journal of Human Movement Studies. 4:1978;59-69.
19. Howell, A. J. & Buxton, H. (1997). Recognising simple behaviours using time-delay RBF networks. Neural Processing Letters, 5, 97-104.
20. Huang, P. S., Harris, C. J., & Nixon, M. S. (1998). Comparing different template features for recognizing people by their gait. In British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC).
21. Johansson G. Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception and Psychophysics. 14:1973;201-211.
22. Kozlowski L.T., Cutting J.E. Recognizing the sex of a walker from a dynamic point-light display. Perception & Psychophysics. 21(6):1977;575-580.
23. Kruskal J.B., Wish M. Multidimensional scaling, sage university paper series on quantitative applications in the social sciences. 1978;7-11 Sage Publications, Beverly Hills and London.
24. Lakany, H. & Hayes, G. (1997). An algorithm for recognising walkers. In: J. Bigun, G. Chollet, & G. Borgefors (Eds.), Audio- and Video-based Biometric Person Authentication (pp. 112-118). IAPR, Springer.
25. Lippman R.P. An introduction to computing with neural nets. IEEE ASSP Magazine. 1987;4-22.
26. Little J., Boyd J. Describing motion for recognition. Videre. 1:1998;1-32.
27. Liu Z., Knill D.C., Kersten D. Object classification for human and ideal observers. Vision Research. 35:1995;549-568.
28. Mather G., Murdoch L. Gender discrimination in biological motion displays based on dynamic cues. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. 258:1994;273-279.
29. Pollick F.E., Sapiro G. Constant affine velocity predicts the 1/3 power law of drawing and planar motion perception. Vision Research. 37:1997;347-353.
30. Pollick F.E., Fidopiastis C.M., Braden V. Recognizing the style of spatially exaggerated tennis serves. Perception. 30:2001a;323-338.
31. Pollick F.E., Paterson H., Bruderlin A., Sanford A.J. Perceiving affect from arm movement. Cognition. 82:2001b;B51-B61.
32. Rhodes G. Superportraits: Caricatures and Recognition. 1996;Psychology Press, Hove, England.
33. Runeson S. Perception of biological motion: The KSD-principle. Jansson G., Bergstrom S.S., Epstein W. Perceiving events and objects. 1994;383-405.
34. Runeson S., Frykholm G. Visual perception of lifted weight. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 7:1981;733-740.
35. Runeson S., Frykholm G. Kinematic specification of dynamics as an informational basis for person-and-action perception: Expectation, gender recognition, and deceptive intention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 112:1983;585-615.
36. Russell J.A. A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 39:1980;1161-1178.
37. Shiffrar M., Freyd J.J. Timing and apparent motion path choice with human body photographs. Psychological Science. 4:1993;379-384.
38. Sidenbladh, H., Black, M. J., & Sigal, L. (2002). Implicit probabilistic models of human motion for synthesis and tracking. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV).
39. Stevenage S.V., Nixon M.S., Vince K. Visual analysis of gait as a cue to identity. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 13:1999;51-526.
40. Stevens J.A., Fonlupt P., Shiffrar M., Decety J. New aspects of motion perception: Selective neural encoding of apparent human movements. Neuroreport. 11:2000;109-115.
41. Thornton I.M., Pinto J., Shiffrar M. The visual perception of human locomotion. Cognitive Neuropsychology. 15:1998;535-552.
42. Tjan B., Legge G.E. The viewpoint complexity of an object recognition task. Vision Research. 38:1998;2335-2350.
43. Todd J.T. Perception of gait. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 9:1983;31-42.
44. Troje N.F. Decomposing biological motion: A linear model for analysis and synthesis of human gait patterns. Journal of Vision. 1(3):2001;. abstract 353.
45. Valentine T. A unified account of the effects of distinctiveness, inversion, and race upon face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 43A:1991;161-204.
46. Walk R.D., Homan C.P. Emotion and dance in dynamic light displays. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society. 22:1984;437-440.
47. Werbos P.J. Beyond Regression: New Tools for Prediction and Analysis in the Behavioral Sciences. The Roots of Backpropagation. 1994;John Wiley & Sons, New York.
48. Yik M.S.M., Russell J.A., Barrett L.F. Structure of self-reported current affect: Integration and beyond. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 77(3):1999;600-619.