Recognition by humans and pigeons of novel views of 3-D objects and their photographs

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Volumn 134, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 149-162

  Friedman, Alinda ^a   Spetch, Marcia L ^a   Ferrey, Anne ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PIGEONS AND DOVES; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; VISION;

ADULT; ANIMALS; COLUMBIDAE; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MALE; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 18844419993     PISSN: 00963445     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.134.2.149     Document Type: Article

References (40)

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 in-variance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 1506-1514.
3. Broomhead, D. S., & Lowe, D. (1988). Multivariable functional interpolation and adaptive networks. Complex Systems, 2, 321-355.
4. Bülthoff, H. H., & Edelman, S. (1992). Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 89, 60-64.
5. Bülthoff, H. H., Edelman, S., & Tarr, M. J. (1995). How are three-dimensional objects represented in the brain? Cerebral Cortex, 3, 247-260.
6. Cabe, P. A. (1976). Transfer of discrimination from solid objects to pictures by pigeons: A test of theoretical models of pictorial perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 19, 545-550.
7. DeLoache, J., & Burns, N. (1994). Early understanding of the representational function of pictures. Cognition, 52, 83-110.
8. Deregowski, J. B. (1989). Real space and represented space: Cross-cultural perspectives. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 51-119.
9. Diwadkar, V. A., & McNamara, T. P. (1997). Viewpoint dependence in scene recognition. Psychological Science, 8, 302-307.
10. Edelman, S. (1995). Class similarity and viewpoint invariance in the recognition of 3D objects. Biological Cybernetics, 72, 207-220.
11. Edelman, S. (1999). Representation and recognition in vision. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. 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.
13. Edelman, S., Bülthoff, H. H., & Bülthoff, I. (1999). Effects of parametric manipulation of inter-stimulus similarity on 3D object categorization. Spatial Vision, 12, 107-123.
14. Fagot, J. (Ed.). (2000). Picture perception in animals. Philadelphia: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis.
15. Fagot, J., Martin-Malivel, J., & Depy, D. (1999). What is the evidence for an equivalence between objects and pictures in birds and nonhuman primates? Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive/Current Psychology of Cognition, 18, 923-949.
16. Friedman, A., Spetch, M. L., & Lank, I. (2003). An automated apparatus for presenting depth-rotated three-dimensional objects for use in human and animal object recognition research. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 343-349.
17. Honig, W. K., & Urcuioli, P. J. (1981). The legacy of Guttman and Kalish (1956): 25 years of research on stimulus generalization. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 36, 405-445.
18. Jolicoeur, P., Regehr, S., Smith, L. B. J. P., & Smith, G. N. (1985). Mental rotation of representations of two-dimensional and three-dimensional objects. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 39, 100-129.
19. Logothetis, N. K., Pauls, J., Bülthoff, H. H., & Poggio, T. (1994). View-dependent object recognition by monkeys. Current Biology, 4, 401-414.
20. Lumsden, E. A. (1977). Generalization of an operant response to photographs and drawings/silhouettes of a three-dimensional object at various orientations. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 10, 405-407.
21. Masson, M. E. J., & Loftus, G. R. (2003). Using confidence intervals for graphically based data interpretation. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 203-220.
22. McNeel, R., & Associates. (2001). Rhinocerous 1.1. [Computer software]. Seattle, WA: Author.
23. Nicholson, J. R., & Seddon, G. M. (1977), The influence of secondary depth cues on the understanding by Nigerian schoolboys of spatial relationships in pictures. British Journal of Psychology, 68, 327-333.
24. Peissig, J. J., Wasserman, E. A., Young, M. E., & Biederman, I. (2002). Learning an object from multiple views enhances its recognition in an orthogonal rotational axis in pigeons. Vision Research, 42, 2051-2062.
25. Poggio, T., & Edelman, S. (1990, January 18). A network that learns to recognize three-dimensional objects. Nature, 343, 263-267.
26. Segall, M. H., Campbell, D. T., & Herskovits, M. J. (1966). The influence of culture on visual perception, Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
27. Shepard, D. (1968). A two-dimensional interpolation function for irregularly spaced data. Proceedings of the 23rd National Conference of the ACM, 517-524.
28. Spence, K. W. (1937). The differential response of animals to stimuli differing within a single dimension. Psychological Review, 44, 430-444.
29. Spetch, M. L., & Friedman, A. (2003). Recognizing rotated views of objects: Interpolation versus generalization by humans and pigeons, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 135-140.
30. Spetch, M. L., Friedman, A., & Reid, S. L. (2001). The effect of distinctive parts on recognition of depth-rotated objects by pigeons (Columba livia) and humans. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 238-255.
31. 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.
32. Tarr, M. J., & Bülthoff, H. H. (1998). Image-based object recognition in man, monkey, and machine. In M. J. Tarr & H. H. Bülthoff (Eds,), Object recognition in man, monkey, and machine (pp, 1-20). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. 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.
34. Tarr, M. J., & Pinker, S. (1989). Mental rotation and orientation dependence in shape recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 233-282.
35. Ullman, S. (1989). Aligning pictorial descriptions: An approach to object recognition. Cognition, 32, 193-254.
36. Waller, D., Beall, A. C., & Loomis, J. M. (2004). Using virtual environments to assess directional knowledge. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 105-116.
37. 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 stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 22, 205-221.
38. Watanabe, S. (1993). Object-picture equivalence in the pigeon: An analysis with natural concept and pseudoconcept discriminations. Behavioural Processes, 30, 225-231.
39. Watanabe, S. (1999). Enhancement of viewpoint invariance by experience in pigeons. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive/Current Psychology of Cognition, 18, 321-335.
40. Watson, B., Friedman, A., & McGaffey, A. (2000, April). Using naming time to evaluate quality predictors for model simplification. Proceedings of the ACM CHI 2000 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 113-120.