Depth rotation and mirror-image reflection reduce affective preference as well as recognition memory for pictures of novel objects

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 32, Issue 7, 2004, Pages 1170-1181

  Lawson, Rebecca ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AFFECT; AFFECTIVE PREFERENCE; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; DEPTH ROTATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGE QUALITY; MEMORY; MIRROR IMAGE REFLECTION; NORMAL HUMAN; RECOGNITION; RECOGNITION MEMORY; ROTATION; TASK PERFORMANCE;

EID: 14844329861     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196890     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. BAR, M., & BIEDERMAN, I. (1998). Subliminal visual priming. Psychological Science, 9, 464-469.
2. BAR, M., & BIEDERMAN, I. (1999). Localizing the cortical region mediating visual awareness of object identity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96, 1790-1793.
3. BIEDERMAN, I., & COOPER, E. E. (1991). Evidence for complete translational and reflectional invariance in visual object priming. Perception, 20, 585-593.
4. BIEDERMAN, I., & COOPER, E. E. (1992). Size invariance in visual object priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 13, 640-645.
5. BIEDERMAN, I., & GERHARDSTEIN, P. C. (1993). Recognizing depth-rotated objects: Evidence for 3-D viewpoint invariance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 19, 1162-1182.
6. BUCHNER, A., & BRANDT, M. (2003). Further evidence for systematic reliability differences between explicit and implicit memory tests. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 193-209.
7. BUCHNER, A., & WIPPICH, W. (2000). On the reliability of implicit and explicit memory measures. Cognitive Psychology, 40, 227-259.
8. COOPER, L. A., SCHACTER, D. L., BALLESTEROS, S., & MOORE, C. (1992). Priming and recognition of transformed three-dimensional objects: Effects of size and reflection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 43-57.
9. FISER, J., & BIEDERMAN, I. (2001). Invariance of long-term visual priming to scale, reflection, translation, and hemisphere. Vision Research, 41, 221-234.
10. HALLAHAN, M., & ROSENTHAL, R. (1996). Statistical power: Concepts, procedures, and applications. Behavior Research & Therapy, 34, 489-499.
11. HENDERSON, J. M., & SIEFERT, A. B. C. (1999). The influence of enantiomorphic transformation on transsaccadic object integration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 243-255.
12. HUMPHREY, G. K., & KHAN, S. C. (1992). Recognising novel views of 3-D objects. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 46, 170-190.
13. JOLICOEUR, P. (1987). A size-congruency effect in memory for visual shape. Memory & Cognition, 15, 531-543.
14. KUNST-WILSON, W. R., & ZAJONC, R. B. (1980). Affective discrimination of stimuli that cannot be recognized. Science, 207, 557-558.
15. LAWSON, R., BÜLTHOFF, H. H., & DUMBELL, S. (2003). Interactions between view changes and shape changes in picture-picture matching. Perception, 32, 1465-1498.
16. LAWSON, R., & HUMPHREYS, G. W. (1998). View specific effects of depth rotation and foreshortening on the initial recognition and priming of familiar objects. Perception & Psychophysics, 60, 1052-1066.
17. LIU, T., & COOPER, L. A. (2001). The influence of task requirements on priming in object decision and matching. Memory & Cognition, 29, 874-882.
18. MEIER, B., & PERRIG, W. J. (2000). Low reliability of perceptual priming: Consequences for the interpretation of functional dissociations between explicit and implicit memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 211-233.
19. MILLIKEN, B., & JOLICOEUR, P. (1992). Size effects in visual recognition memory are determined by perceived size. Memory & Cognition, 20, 83-95.
20. NEWELL, B. R., & BRIGHT, J. E. H. (2003). The subliminal mere exposure effect does not generalize to structurally related stimuli. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 61-68.
21. POLLATSEK, A., RAYNER, K., & COLLINS, W. E. (1984). Integrating pictorial information across eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 426-442.
22. SCHACTER, D. L. (1987). Implicit memory: History and current status. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 13, 501-518.
23. SCHACTER, D. L., COOPER, L. A., & DELANEY, S. M. (1990). Implicit memory for unfamiliar objects depends on access to structural descriptions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 5-24.
24. SCHACTER, D. L., COOPER, L. A., DELANEY, S. M., PETERSON, M. A., & THARAN, M. (1991). Implicit memory for possible and impossible objects: Constraints on the construction of structural descriptions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 3-19.
25. SEAMON, J. G., & DELGADO, M. R. (1999). Recognition memory and affective preference for depth-rotated solid objects: Part-based structural descriptions may underlie the mere exposure effect. Visual Cognition, 6, 145-164.
26. SEAMON, J. G., GANOR-STERN, D., CROWLEY, M. J., WILSON, S. M., WEBER, W. J., O'ROURKE, C. M., & MAHONEY, J. K. (1997). A mere exposure effect for transformed three-dimensional objects: Effects of reflection, size, or color changes on affect and recognition. Memory & Cognition, 25, 367-374.
27. SEAMON, J. G., WILLIAMS, P. C., CROWLEY, M. J., KIM, I. J., LANGER, S. A., ORNE, P. J., & WISHENGRAD, D. L. (1995). The mere exposure effect is based on implicit memory: Effects of stimulus type, encoding conditions, and number of exposures on recognition and affect judgements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 711-721.
28. SQUIRE, L. R. (1992). Memory and the hippocampus: A synthesis from findings with rats, monkeys, and humans. Psychological Review, 99, 195-231.
29. SRINIVAS, K. (1993). Perceptual specificity in nonverbal priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 19, 582-602.
30. SRINIVAS, K. (1995). Representation of rotated objects in explicit and implicit memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 1019-1036.
31. SRINIVAS, K. (1996). Size and reflection effects in priming: A test of transfer-appropriate processing. Memory & Cognition, 24, 441-452.
32. SRINIVAS, K., & VERFAELLIE, M. (2000). Orientation effects in amnesics' recognition memory: Familiarity-based access to object attributes. Journal of Memory & Language, 43, 274-290.
33. 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 & Performance, 24, 732-744.
34. 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.
35. TARR, M. J. (2003). Visual object recognition: Can a single mechanism suffice? In M. A. Peterson & G. Rhodes (Eds.), Perception of faces, objects, and scenes: Analytic and holistic processes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. TARR, M. J., & CHENG, Y. D. (2003). Learning to see faces and objects. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 23-30.
37. VERNON, D., & LLOYD-JONES, T. J. (2003). The role of colour in implicit and explicit memory performance. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 779-802.
38. WHITTLESEA, B. W. A., & PRICE, J. R. (2001). Implicit/explicit memory versus analytic/nonanalytic processing: Rethinking the mere exposure effect. Memory & Cognition, 29, 234-246.
39. ZAJONC, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology Monographs, 9 (2, Pt. 2), 1-27.