Laterality effects in the recognition of depth-rotated novel objects

Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 100-111

  Curby, Kim M ^a   Hayward, William G ^b   Gauthier, Isabel ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN ASYMMETRY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEPTH PERCEPTION; DEPTH ROTATED LATERALIZED SEQUENTIAL MATCHING TASK; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEFT HEMISPHERE; NORMAL HUMAN; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION; RIGHT HEMISPHERE; SEMANTICS; TASK PERFORMANCE;

EID: 2942724299     PISSN: 15307026     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/CABN.4.1.100     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. BIEDERMAN, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94, 115-147.
2. BIEDERMAN, I., & BAR, M. (1999). One-shot viewpoint invariance in matching novel objects. Vision Research, 39, 2885-2899.
3. BIEDERMAN, I., & COOPER, E. E. (1991a). Evidence for complete translational and reflectional invariance in visual object priming. Perception, 20, 585-593.
4. BIEDERMAN, I., & COOPER, E. E. (1991b). Object recognition and laterality: Null effects. Neuropsychologia, 29, 695-702.
5. BIEDERMAN, I., & COOPER, E. E. (1992). Size invariance in visual object priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 121-133.
6. BIEDERMAN, I., & GERHARDSTEIN, P. C. (1993). Recognizing depth-rotated objects: Evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 19, 1162-1182.
7. BOOKHEIMER, S. (2002). Functional MRI of language: New approaches to understanding the cortical organization of semantic processing. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 25, 151-188.
8. BURGUND, E. D., & MARSOLEK, C. J. (1997). Letter-case-specific priming in the right cerebral hemisphere with a form-specific perceptual identification task. Brain & Cognition, 35, 239-258.
9. BURGUND, E. D., & MARSOLEK, C. J. (2000). Viewpoint-invariant and viewpoint-dependent object recognition in dissociable neural sub-systems. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 480-489.
10. CABEZA, R., & NYBERG, L. (2000). Imaging cognition: II. An empirical review of 275 PET and fMRI studies. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 1-47.
11. CARPENTER, R. H. S. (1981). Oculomotor procrastination. In D. F. Fisher, R. A. Monty, & J. W. Senders (Eds.), Eye movements: Cognition and visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. COOPER, E. E., BIEDERMAN, I., & HUMMEL, J. E. (1992). Metric invariance in object recognition: A review and further evidence. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 46, 191-214.
13. CORBALLIS, M. C., ZBRODOFF, N. J., SHETZER, L. I., & BUTLER, P. B. (1984). Decisions about identity and orientation of rotated letters and digits. Memory & Cognition, 6, 98-107.
14. DAVIDOFF, J., & WARRINGTON, E. K. (1999). Apperceptive agnosia: A deficit of perceptual categorisation of objects. In G. W. Humphreys (Ed.), Case studies in the neuropsychology of vision (pp. 59-79). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
15. DEMB, J. B., DESMOND, J. E., WAGNER, A. D., VAIDYA, C. J., GLOVER, G. H., & GABRIELI, J. D. E. (1995). Semantic encoding and retrieval in the left inferior prefrontal cortex: A functional MRI study of task difficulty and process specificity. Journal of Neuroscience, 15, 5870-5878.
16. FARAH, M. J. (1992). Is an object an object an object? Cognitive and neuropsychological investigations of domain-specificity in visual object recognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 164-169.
17. FUNNELL, M. G., CORBALLIS, P. M., & GAZZANIGA, M. S. (1999). A deficit in perceptual matching in the left hemisphere of a callosotomy patient. Neuropsychologia, 37, 1143-1154.
18. GAUTHIER, I., JAMES, T., CURBY, K. M., & TARR, M. J. (2003). The influence of conceptual knowledge on visual discrimination. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 507-523.
19. HAYWARD, W. G. (1998). Effects of outline shape in object recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 427-440.
20. HAYWARD, W. G., & TARR, M. J. (1997). Testing conditions for viewpoint invariance in object recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 23, 1511-1521.
21. HAYWARD, W. G., & WILLIAMS, P. (2000). Viewpoint dependence and object discriminability. Psychological Science, 11, 7-12.
22. HELLIGE, J. B. (2001). Hemispheric asymmetry: What's right and what left. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. HUMMEL, J. E., & STANKIEWICZ, B. J. (1998). Two roles for attention in shape perception: A structural description model of visual scrutiny. Visual Cognition, 5, 49-79.
24. JAMES, T. W., & GAUTHIER, I. (2004). Brain areas engaged during visual judgments by involuntary access to novel semantic information. Vision Research, 44, 429-439.
25. KANN, J. (1950). A translation of Broca's original article on the location of the speech center [Remarques sur le siège de la faculté du langage articulé, suivies d'une observation d'aphémie]. Journal of Speech & Hearing Disorders, 15, 16-20. (Original work published 1861)
26. MARSOLEK, C. J. (1995). Abstract visual-form representations in the left cerebral hemisphere. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 375-386.
27. MARSOLEK, C. J. (1999). Dissociable neural subsystems underlie abstract and specific object recognition. Psychological Science, 10, 111-118.
28. MARSOLEK, C. J., KOSSLYN, S. M., & SQUIRE, L. R. (1992). Form-specific visual priming in the right hemisphere. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 492-508.
29. MARSOLEK, C. J., SCHACTER, D. L., & NICHOLAS, C. D. (1996). Form-specific visual priming for new associations in the right cerebral hemisphere. Memory & Cognition, 24, 539-556.
30. MARSOLEK, C. J., SQUIRE, L. R., KOSSLYN, S. M., & LULENSKI, M. E. (1994). Form-specific explicit and implicit memory in the right cerebral hemisphere. Neuropsychology, 8, 588-597.
31. OJEMANN, G. A. (1983). Brain organization for language from the perspective of electrical stimulation mapping. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 6, 189-230.
32. OLDFIELD, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97-113.
33. POGGIO, T., & EDELMAN, S. (1990). A network that learns to recognize three-dimensional objects. Nature, 343, 263-266.
34. RIESENHUBER, M., & POGGIO, T. (1999). Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 1019-1025.
35. SHEPARD, R. N. (1967). Recognition memory for words, sentences, and pictures. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 6, 156-163.
36. SRINIVAS, K. (1995). Representation of rotated objects in explicit and implicit memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 1019-1036.
37. 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.
38. TARR, M. J., & BÜLTHOFF, H. H. (1995). Is human object recognition better described by geon structural descriptions or by multiple views? Comments on Biederman and Gerhardstein (1993). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 1494-1505.
39. TARR, M. J., & GAUTHIER, I. (1998). Do viewpoint-dependent mechanisms generalize across members of a class? Cognition, 67, 73-110.
40. TARR, M. J., & PINKER, S. (1989). Mental rotation and orientation-dependence in shape recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 233-282.
41. TARR, M. J., & PINKER, S. (1990). When does human object recognition use a viewer-centered reference frame? Psychological Science, 1, 253-256.
42. TARR, M. J., WILLIAMS, P., HAYWARD, W. G., & GAUTHIER, I. (1998). Three-dimensional object recognition is viewpoint dependent. Nature Neuroscience, 1, 275-277.
43. VANDENBERGHE, R., PRICE, C., WISE, R., JOSEPHS, O., & FRACKOWIAK, R. S. J. (1996). Functional anatomy of a common semantic system for words and pictures. Nature, 383, 254-256.
44. VUILLEUMIER, P., HENSON, R. N., DRIVER, J., & DOLAN, R. J. (2002). Multiple levels of visual object constancy revealed by event-related fMRI of repetition priming. Nature Neuroscience, 5, 491-499.
45. WAGNER, A. D., DESMOND, J. E., DEMB, J. B., GLOVER, G. H., & GABRIELI, J. D. E.(1997). Semantic repetition priming for verbal and pictorial knowledge: A functional MRI study of left inferior prefrontal cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 714-726.
46. WARRINGTON, E. K., & JAMES, M. (1991). A new test of object decision: 2D silhouettes featuring a minimal view. Cortex, 27, 377-383.
47. WARRINGTON, E. K., & TAYLOR, A. M. (1978). Two categorical stages of object recognition. Perception, 7, 695-705.