The contribution of monocular depth cues to scene perception by pigeons

Psychological Science

Volumn 17, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 628-634

  Cavoto, Brian R ^a   Cook, Robert G ^a  

^a TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ASSOCIATION; DEPTH PERCEPTION; MALE; MONOCULAR VISION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PIGEONS AND DOVES; REVIEW; VISION;

ANIMALS; COLUMBIDAE; CUES; DEPTH PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; VISION, MONOCULAR; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 33745635722     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: 14679280     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01755.x     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Aust, U., & Huber, L. (2001). The role of item- and category-sped Tic information in the discrimination of people versus nonpeople images by pigeons. Animal Learning & Behavior, 29, 107-119.
2. Bovet, D., & Vauclair, J. (2000). Picture recognition in animals and humans. Behavioural Brain Research, 109, 143-165.
3. Cavoto, K.K., & Cook, R.G. (2001). Cognitive precedence for local information in hierarchical stimulus processing by pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 27, 3-16.
4. Cerella, J. (1977). Absence of perspective processing in the pigeon. Pattern, Recognition, 9, 65-68.
5. Cerella, J. (1980). The pigeon's analysis of pictures. Pattern Recognition, 9, 1-6.
6. Cerella, J. (1990). Pigeon pattern perception: Limits on perspective invariance. Perception & Psychophysics, 19, 141-159.
7. Cook, R.G. (1992). Dimensional organization and texture discrimination in pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 18, 354-363.
8. Cook, R.G. (Ed.). (2001). Avian visual cognition. Available http:// www.pigeon.psy.tufts.edu/avc/
9. Cook, R.G., Cavoto, B.R., Katz, J.S., & Cavoto, K.K. (1997). Pigeon perception and discrimination of rapidly changing texture stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 23, 390-400.
10. Cook, R.G., & Katz, J.S. (1999). Dynamic object perception by pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 25, 194-210.
11. Cook, R.G., Kaz, G., & Brooks, D.I. (2005). Avian detection and identification of perceptual organization in random noise. Behavioral Processes, 69, 79-95.
12. Cook, R.G., Levison, D.G., Gillet, S., & Blaisdell, A.P. (2005). Capacity and limits of associative memory in pigeons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 350-358.
13. Cutting, J.E. (1997). How the eye measures reality and virtual reality. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 29, 27-36.
14. Cutting, J.E., & Vishton, P.M. (1995). Perceiving layout and knowing distances: The integration, relative potency, and contextual use of different information about depth. In W. Epstein & S. Rogers (Eds.), Handbook of perception and cognition: Vol. 5, Perception of space and motion, (pp. 69-117). San Diego, C A: Academic Press.
15. D'Amato, M.R., & Van Sant, P. (1988). The person concept in monkeys (Cebus apella). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 14, 43-55.
16. DiPietro, N.T., Wasserman, E.A., & Young, M.E. (2002). Effects of occlusion on pigeons' visual object recognition. Perception, 31, 1299-1312.
17. Fagot, J. (2000). Picture perception in animals. Hove, England: Psychology Press.
18. 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, 18, 923-949.
19. Forkrnan, B. (1998). Hens use occlusion to judge depth in a two-dimensional picture. Perception, 27, 861-867.
20. Forkman, B., & Vallortigara, G. (1999). Minimization of modal contours: An essential cross-species strategy in disambiguating relative depth. Animal Cognition, 2, 181-185.
21. Fujita, K. (2001). Perceptual completion in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatto) and pigeons (Columba livia). Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 115-125.
22. Fujita, K., Blough, D.S., & Blough, P.M. (1991). Pigeons see the Ponzo illusion. Animal learning & Behavior, 19, 283-293.
23. Fujita, K., Blough, D.S., & Blough, P.M. (1993). Effects of the inclination of context lines on perception of the Ponzo illusion by pigeons. Animal Learning & Behavior, 21, 29-34.
24. Fujita, K., & Ushitani, T. (2005). Better living by not completing: A wonderful peculiarity of pigeon vision. Behavioural Processes, 69, 59-66.
25. Herrnstein, R.J., & Loveland, D.H. (1964). Complex visual concept in the pigeon. Science, 146, 549-551.
26. Hillis, J.M., Ernst, M.O., Banks, M.S., & Landy, M.S. (2002). Combining sensory information: Mandatory fusion within, but not between, senses. Science, 298, 1627-1630.
27. Hollard, V.D., & Delius, J.D. (1982). Rotational invariance in visual pattern recognition by pigeons and humans. Science, 218, 804-806.
28. Jitsumori, M. (1991). Do monkeys see meaningful objects in slide pictures? In A. Eharu (Ed.), Primatology today (pp. 293-296). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
29. Kelly, D.M., & Cook, R.G. (2003). Differential effects of visual context on pattern discrimination by pigeons (Columba livia) and humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 117, 200-208.
30. Lea, S.E.G., Slater, A.M., & Ryan, C.M.E. (1996). Perception of object unity in chicks: A comparison with the human infant. Infant Behavior and Development, 19, 501-504.
31. McFadden, S.A. (1993). Constructing the three-dimensional image. In H.P. Zeigler & H.J. Bischof (Eds.), Vision, brain, and behavior In birds (pp. 47-62). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. Miller, R.J. (1973). Cross-cultural research in the perception of pictorial materials. Psychologwal Bulletin, 81, 135-150.
33. Regolin, L., & Vallortigara, C. (1995). Perception of partly occluded objects by young chicks. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 971-976.
34. Reid, S., & Spetch, M.L. (1998). Perception of pictorial depth cues by pigeons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 698-704.
35. Ryan, C.M.E., & Lea, S.E.G. (1994). Images of conspecifics as categories to be discriminated by pigeons and chickens: Slides, video tapes, stuffed birds and live birds. Behavioural Processes,33,155-175.
36. Sekuler, A.B., Lee, J.A.J., & Shettleworth, S.J. (1996). Pigeons do not complete partly occluded figures. Perception, 25, 1109-1120.
37. Ushitani, T., & Fujita, K. (2005). Pigeons do not perceptually complete partly occluded photos of food: An ecological approach to the "pigeon problem." Behavioural Processes, 69, 67-78.
38. Vaughan, W., & Greene, S.L. (1984). Pigeon visual memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 10, 256-271.
39. Wasserman, E.A., Kirkpatrick-Steger, K., Van Hamme, L.J., & Biederman, I. (1993). Pigeons are sensitive to the spatial organization of complex visual stimuli. Psychological Science, 4, 336-341.
40. Watanabe, S., & Furuya, I. (1997). Video display for study of avian visual cognition: From psychophysics to sign language. International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 10, 111-127.