Prior experience affects amodal completion in pigeons

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 69, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 596-605

  Nagasaka, Yasuo ^a,b   Lazareva, Olga F ^a   Wasserman, Edward A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^b RIKEN BRAIN SCIENCE INSTITUTE   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34547841541     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03193917     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. ALI, S., RIPLEY, D. S., & ROBERTS, T. J. (1980). Handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan: Together with those of Bangladesh, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan and Sri Lanka. Volume 2: Megapodes to crab plover (2nd ed.). Delhi, India: Oxford University Press.
2. AUST, U., & HUBER, L. (2006). Does the use of natural stimuli facilitate amodal completion in pigeons? Perception, 35, 333-349.
3. BAKIN, J. S., NAKAYAMA, K., & GILBERT, C. D. (2000). Visual responses in monkey areas V1 and V2 to three-dimensional surface configuration. Journal of Neuroscience, 20, 8188-8198.
4. BLOUGH, D. S. (1982). Pigeon perception of letters of the alphabet Science, 218, 397-398.
5. BURACK, J. A., ENNS, J. T., IAROCCI, G., & RANDOLPH, B. (2000). Age differences in visual search for compound patterns: Long- versus short-range grouping. Developmental Psychology, 36, 731-740.
6. CAVOTO, B., & COOK, R. G. (2006). The contribution of monocular depth cues to scene perception in pigeons. Psychological Science, 17, 628-634.
7. CERELLA, J. (1980). The pigeon's analysis of pictures. Pattern Recognition, 12, 1-6.
8. DERUELLE, C., BARBET, I., DÉPY, D., & FAGOT, J. (2000). Perception of partly occluded figures by baboons (Papio papio). Perception, 29, 1483-1497.
9. DIPIETRO, N. T., WASSERMAN, E. A., & YOUNG, M. E. (2002). Effects of occlusion on pigeons' visual object recognition. Perception, 31, 1299-1312.
10. ENNS, J. T., & KINGSTONE, A. (1995). Access to global and local properties in visual search for compound stimuli. Psychological Science, 6, 283-291.
11. FAGOT, J., & BARBET, I. (2006). Amodal completion by baboons (Papio papio): Contribution of background depth cues. Primates, 47, 145-150.
12. FORKMAN, B. (1998). Hens use occlusion to judge depth in a two-dimensional picture. Perception, 27, 861-867.
13. FORKMAN, B., & VALLORTIGARA, G. (1999). Minimization of modal contours: An essential cross-species strategy in disambiguating relative depth. Animal Cognition, 2, 181-185.
14. FUJITA, K. (2001). Perceptual completion in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) and pigeons (Columba livia). Perception A Psychophysics, 63, 115-125.
15. FUJITA, K., & USHITANI, T. (2005). Better living by not completing: A wonderful peculiarity of pigeon vision? Behavioural Processes, 69, 59-66.
16. GIBSON, B. M., WASSERMAN, E. A., FREI, L., & MILLER, K. (2004). Recent advances in operant conditioning technology: A versatile and affordable computerized touchscreen system. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, A Computers, 36, 355-362.
17. GIBSON, E. J. (1969). Principles of perceptual learning and development. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
18. GIBSON, J. J., & GIBSON, E. J. (1955). Perceptual learning: Differentiation or enrichment? Psychological Review, 62, 32-41.
19. GOLDSTONE, R. L. (1998). Perceptual learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 585-612.
20. GOLDSTONE, R. L. (2003). Learning to perceive while perceiving to learn. In R. Kimchi, M. Behrmann, & C. R. Olson (Eds.), Perceptual organization in vision: Behavioral and neural perspectives (pp. 233-280). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. JOHNSON, S. P. (2003). Development of fragmented versus holistic object perception. In G. Schwarzer & H. Leder (Eds.), The development of face processing (pp. 3-17). Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber.
22. JOHNSON, S. P., & NÁÑEZ, J. E. (1995). Young infants' perception of object unity in two-dimensional displays. Infant Behavior A Development, 18, 133-143.
23. KANIZSA, G. (1979). Organization in vision: Essays on Gestalt perception. New York: Praeger.
24. KANIZSA, G., RENZI, P., CONTE, S., COMPOSTELA, C., & GUERANI, L. (1993). Amodal completion in mouse vision. Perception, 22, 713-721.
25. KAVSEK, M. (2004). The influence of context on amodal completion in 5- and 7-month-old infants. Journal of Cognition A Development, 5, 159-184.
26. KELLMAN, P. J., GARRIGAN, P., & SHIPLEY, T. F. (2005). Object interpolation in three dimensions. Psychological Review, 112, 586-609.
27. KELLMAN, P. J., GUTTMAN, S. E., & WICKENS, T. D. (2001). Geometric and neural models of object perception. In T. F. Shipley & P. J. Kellman (Eds.), From fragments to objects: Segmentation and grouping in vision (pp. 183-245). New York: Elsevier.
28. KELLMAN, P. J., & SPELKE, E. S. (1983). Perception of partly occluded objects in infancy. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 483-524.
29. KEMLER, D. G. (1983). Exploring and reexploring issues of integrality, perceptual sensitivity, and dimensional salience. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 36, 365-379.
30. LAZAREVA, O. F., WASSERMAN, E. A., & BIEDERMAN, I. (2007). Pigeons' recognition of partially occluded objects depends on specific training experience. Perception, 36, 33-48.
31. 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 A Development, 19, 501-504.
32. MURTON, R., & WESTWOOD, N. (1966). The foods of the Rock Dove and feral pigeon. Bird Study, 13, 130-146.
33. NAGASAKA, Y., HORI, K., & OSADA, Y. (2005). Perceptual grouping in pigeons. Perception, 34, 625-632.
34. NAGASAKA, Y., & OSADA, Y. (2000). Subjective contours, amodal completion, and transparency in animals. Japanese Journal of Animal Psychology, 50, 61-73.
35. NAKAYAMA, K., SHIMOJO, S., & SILVERMAN, G. H. (1989). Stereoscopic depth: Its relation to image segmentation, grouping, and the recognition of occluded objects. Perception, 18, 55-68.
36. OKANOYA, K., & TAKAHASHI, M. (2000). Shikaku-teki hokan e no seitaigaku-teki apuroochi [Ecological approach to visual completion]. Kokoro no hattatsu: Ninchi-teki seicho no kikoo 1999 [Reports of the Grant-in-aid for Scientific Research for Priority Areas] (pp. 34-41).
37. OSADA, Y., & SCHILLER, P. H. (1994). Can monkeys see objects under conditions of transparency and occlusion? Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 35, 1664.
38. PALMER, S. E. (1999). Vision science: Photons to phenomenology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39. PODGORNY, P., & GARNER, W. R. (1979). Reaction time as a measure of inter- and intraobject visual similarity: Letters of the alphabet Perception A Psychophysics, 26, 37-52.
40. REGULIN, L., MARCONATO, F., & VALLORTIGARA, G. (2004). Hemispheric differences in the recognition of partly occluded objects by newly hatched domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). Animal Cognition, 7, 162-170.
41. REGOLIN, L., & VALLORTIGARA, G. (1995). Perception of partly occluded objects by young chicks. Perception A Psychophysics, 57, 971-976.
42. SATO, A., KANAZAWA, S., & FUJITA, K. (1997). Perception of object unity in a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Japanese Psychological Research, 39, 191-199.
43. SEKULER, A. B., LEE, J. A. J., & SHETTLEWORTH, S. J. (1996). Pigeons do not complete partly occluded figures. Perception, 25, 1109-1120.
44. SHTMIZU, T. (1998). Conspecific recognition in pigeons (Columba livia) using dynamic video images. Behaviour, 135, 43-53.
45. SLATER, A., MORISON, V., SOMERS, M., MATTOCK, A., BROWN, E., & TAYLOR, D. (1990). Newborn and older infants' perception of partly occluded objects. Infant Behavior A Development, 13, 33-49.
46. SMITH, L. B. (1985). Young children's attention to global magnitude: Evidence from classification tasks. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 39, 472-491.
47. SMITH, L. B. (1989). A model of perceptual classification in children and adults. Psychological Review, 96, 125-144.
48. SUGITA, Y. (1999). Grouping of image fragments in primary visual cortex. Nature, 401, 269-272.
49. TIMNEY, B., & KEIL, K. (1996). Horses are sensitive to pictorial depth cues. Perception, 25, 1121-1128.
50. 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.
51. USHITANI, T., FUJITA, K., & YAMANAKA, R. (2001). Do pigeons (Columba livia) perceive object unity? Animal Cognition, 4, 153-161.
52. VALLORTIGARA, G. (2004). Visual cognition and representation in birds and primates. In L. J. Rogers & G. Kaplan (Eds.), Comparative vertebrate cognition: Are primates superior to non-primates? (pp. 57-94). New York: Kluwer/Plenum.
53. VALLORTIGARA, G. (2006). The cognitive chicken: Visual and spatial cognition in a non-mammalian brain. In E. A. Wasserman & T. R. Zentall (Eds.), Comparative cognition: Experimental explorations of animal intelligence (pp. 53-70). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
54. 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.