The role of characteristic motion in object categorization

Journal of Vision

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 118-129

  Newell, Fiona N ^a   Wallraven, Christian ^b   Huber, Susanne ^c  

^a TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR BIOLOGICAL CYBERNETICS   (Germany)

^c FRIEDRICH MIESCHER LABORATORY OF THE MAX PLANCK SOCIETY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Characteristic motion; Motion and shape; Object categorization

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; COLOR DISCRIMINATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEARNING; LONG TERM MEMORY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; NORMAL HUMAN; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; BINOCULAR VISION; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; MOTION PERCEPTION; ORIENTATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; VISION, BINOCULAR;

EID: 1542611577     PISSN: 15347362     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/4.2.5     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Allison, T., Puce, A., & McCarthy, G. (2000). Social perception from visual cues: Role of the STS region. Trends in Cognitive Science, 4(7), 267-278.
2. Bassili, J. N. (1978). Facial motion in the perception of faces and of emotional expression. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4(3), 373-379.
3. Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94, 115-147.
4. 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.
5. Bernstein, L. J., & Cooper, L. A. (1997). Direction of motion influences perceptual identification of ambiguous figures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23(3), 721-737.
6. Bülthoff, H. H., & Edelman, S. (1992). Psychophysical support for a 2-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U. S .A., 89(1), 60-64. [Article]
7. Cavanagh, P., Labianca, A. T., & Thornton, I. M. (2001). Attention-based visual routines: Sprites. Cognition, 80, 47-60.
8. Christie, F., & Bruce, V. (1998). The role of dynamic information in the recognition of unfamiliar faces. Memory and Cognition, 26, 780-790.
9. Cutting, J. E., Proffitt, D. R., & Kozlowski, L. T. (1978). Biomechanical invariant for gait perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4(3), 357-372.
10. Cutzu, F., & Edelman, S. (1994). Canonical views in object representation and recognition. Vision Research, 34(22), 3037-3056.
11. Dubner, R., & Zeki, S. M. (1971). Response properties and receptive fields of cells in an anatomically defined region of the superior temporal sulcus in the monkey. Brain Research, 35, 528-532.
12. Edelman, S. (1999). Representation and recognition in vision. Cambridge: MIT Press.
13. Edelman, S., & Bülthoff, H. H. (1992). Orientation dependence in the recognition of familiar and novel views of three-dimensional objects. Vision Research, 32, 2385-2400.
14. Felleman, D. J., & Van Essen, D. C. (1991). Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 1, 1-47.
15. Giese, M. A., & Lappe, M. (2002). Measurement of generalisation fields for the recognition of biological motion. Vision Research, 42, 1847-1858.
16. Gluck, M. A., & Bower, G. H. (1988). From conditioning to category learning: An adaptive network model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 227-247.
17. Goodale, M. A., & Milner, A. D. (1992). Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends in Neuroscience, 15, 20-25.
18. Haxby, J. V., Hoffman, E. A., & Gobbini, M. I. (2002). Human neural systems for face recognition and social communication. Biological Psychiatry, 51, 59-67.
19. Hill, H., & Johnston, A. (2001). Categorizing sex and identity from the biological motion of faces. Current Biology, 11(11), 880-885.
20. Hummel, J. E. (2001). Complementary solutions to the binding problem in vision: Implications for shape perception and object recognition. Visual Cognition, 8, 489-517.
21. Johansson, G. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception and Psychophysics, 14, 201-211.
22. Kamachi, M., Bruce, V., Mukaida, S., Gyoba, J., Yoshikawa, S., & Akamatsu, S. (2001). Dynamic properties influence the perception of facial expressions. Perception, 30, 875-887.
23. Kersten A. W. (1998a). An examination of the distinction between nouns and verbs: Associations with two different kinds of motion. Memory and Cognition, 26(6), 1214-1232.
24. Kersten A. W. (1998b). A division of labor between nouns and verbs in the representation of motion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127(1), 34-54.
25. Knappmeyer, B., Thornton, I. M., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2003). The use of facial motion and facial form during the processing of identity. Vision Research, 43(18), 1921-1936.
26. Kourtzi, Z., & Kanwisher, N. (2000). Activation in human MT/MST by static images with implied motion. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(1), 48-55.
27. Kourtzi, Z., & Nakayama, K. (2002). Distinct mechanisms for the representation of moving and static objects. Special Issue of Visual Cognition, 9(1/2), 248-264.
28. Kourtzi, Z., & Shiffrar, M. (2001). The visual representation of malleable and rigid objects that deform as they rotate. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 335-355.
29. Kozlowski, L. T., & Cutting, J. E. (1977). Recognizing sex of a walker from a dynamic point-light display. Perception and Psychophysics, 21(6), 575-580.
30. Lander, K., & Bruce, V. (2000). Recognizing famous faces: Exploring the benefits of facial motion. Ecological Psychology, 12(4), 259-272.
31. Lander, K., Christie, F., & Bruce, V. (1999). The role of movement in the recognition of famous faces. Memory and Cognition, 27, 974-985.
32. Lawson, R., & Humphreys, G. W. (1996). View specificity in object processing: Evidence from picture matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 395-416.
33. Mak, B. S. K., & Vera, A. H. (1999). The role of motion in children's categorization of objects. Cognition, 71, B11-B21.
34. Marr, D. (1982). Vision. New York: W.H. Freeman & Company.
35. Massaro, D.W., & Cohen, M. M. (1995). Perceiving talking faces. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4(4), 104-109.
36. Newell, F. N., & Findlay, J. M. (1997). The effect of depth rotation on object identification. Perception, 26(10), 1231-1257.
37. O'Toole, A. J., Roark, D. A., & Abdi, H. (2002). Recognizing moving faces: A psychological and neural synthesis. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(6), 261-266.
38. Oram, M. W., & Perrett, D. I. (1996). Integration of form and motion in the anterior superior temporal polysensory area (STPa) of the macaque monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 76, 109-129.
39. Pike, G. E., Kemp, R. I., Towell, N. A., & Phillips, K. C. (1997). Recognizing moving faces: The relative contribution of motion and perspective view information. Visual Cognition, 4(4), 409-437.
40. Pollick, F. E., Lestou, V., Ryu, J., & Cho, S.-B. (2002). Estimating the efficiency of recognizing gender and affect from biological motion. Vision Research, 42, 2345-2355.
41. Stone J. V. (1998). Object recognition using spatiotemporal signatures. Vision Research, 38, 947-951.
42. Stone J. V. (1999). Object recognition: View-specificity and motion-specificity. Vision Research, 39, 4032-4044.
43. Schwarzer, G. (2000). Development of face processing: The effect of face inversion. Child Development, 71, 391-401.
44. Tanaka, K., & Saito, H. (1989). Analysis of motion of the visual field by direction, expansion/contraction, and rotation cells in the dorsal part of the medial superior temporal area of the macaque monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 62, 626-641.
45. Tanaka, Y. Z., Koyama, T., & Mikami, A. (2002). Visual responses in the temporal cortex to moving objects with invariant contours. Experimental Brain Research, 146, 248-256.
46. Tarr, M. J., & Bülthoff, H. H. (1995). Is human object recognition better described by geon structural descriptions or by multiple views? Comment on Biederman and Gerhardstein (1993). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21(6), 1494-1505.
47. Tarr, M. J., & Pinker, S. (1989). Mental rotation and orientation-dependence in shape recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 233-282.
48. Tinbergen, N. (1951). The Study of Instinct. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
49. Ungerleider, L., & Mishkin, M. (1982). Two cortical visual systems. In D. Ingle, M. Goodale, and R. Mansfield (Eds.), Analysis of visual behaviour. Cambridge: MIT Press.
50. Wallach, H., & O'Connell, D. N. (1953).The kinetic depth effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45, 205-217.
51. Wallis, G. (2002). The role of object motion in forging long-term representations of objects. Visual Cognition, 9(1-2), 233-247.
52. Wallis, G., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2001). Effects of temporal association on recognition memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U. S. A., 98, 4800-4804.