L'influence de la taille typique des objets dans une tâche de catégorisation

Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 61, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 316-321

  Ferrier, Laurent ^a   Staudt, Arnaud ^a   Reilhac, Gilles ^a   Jiménez, Manuel ^a   Brouillet, Denis ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PAUL VALÉRY   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CONCEPT FORMATION; CONFLICT; DECISION MAKING; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME;

ADULT; ATTENTION; CONCEPT FORMATION; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; SIZE PERCEPTION;

EID: 39649122617     PISSN: 11961961     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/cjep2007031     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Alario, F.-X., & Ferrand, L. (1999). A set of 400 pictures standardized for French: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, visual complexity, image variability, and age of acquisition. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31, 531-552.
2. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol system. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660.
3. Barsalou, L. W. (2003). Situated simulation in the human conceptual system. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 513-562.
4. Barsalou, L. W., Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., Simmons, W. K., & Hamann, S. B. (2005). Dans W. Ahn, R. Goldstone, B. Love, A. Markman et P. Wolff (Éds.), Categorization inside and outside the lab: Essays in honor of Douglas L. Medin (pp. 249-270). Washington, DC : American Psychological Association.
5. th Conference of the internationnal Cognitive Linguistics Association, 3 (pp. 209-228). Amsterdam : John Benjamins.
6. Biederman, I. (1981). On the semantics of glance at a scene. Dans M. Kubovy et J. R. Pomeranz (Éds.), Perceptual organisation (pp. 213-254). Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Bruner, J. S., & Goodman, C. D. (1947). Symbolic value and need as organizing factors in perception. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 42, 33-44.
8. Coulter, K. S., &. Coulter, R. A. (2005). Size does matter: The effects of magnitude representation congruency on price perceptions and purchase likelihood. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15, 64-76.
9. Epstein, W. (1965). Nonrelational judgments of size and distance. American Journal of Psychology, 78, 120-123.
10. Gillam, B. (1995). The perception of spatial layout from static optical information. Dans W. Epstein et S. Rogers (dir.), Perception of space and motion. New York : Academic press.
11. Gogel, W. C., & DaSilva, J. A. (1987). Familiar size and the theory of off-size perception. Perception and Psychophysics, 41, 318-328.
12. Hastorf, A. H. (1950). The influence of suggestion on the relationship between stimulus size and perceived distance. Journal of Psychology, 29, 195-217.
13. Ittelson, W. H. (1960). Visual space perception. New York :
14. Springer Publishing Company. Johansson, R., Holsanova, J., & Holmqvist, K. (2006). Pictures and spoken descriptions elicit similar eye movements during mental imagery, both in light and in complete darkness. Cognitive Science, 30, 1053-1079.
15. Kosslyn, S. M., Ball, T. M., & Reiser, B. J. (1978). Visual image preserve metric spatial information: Evidence from studies of image scanning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performances, 4, 47-60.
16. Moyer, R. S. (1973). Comparing object in memory: Evidence suggesting and internal psychophysics. Perception and Psychophysics, 13, 180-184.
17. Paivio, A. (1975). Perceptual comparaisons through the mind's eye. Memory and Cognition, 3, 653-647.
18. Reilhac, G., & Jiménez, M. (2006). Amorçage de la couleur typique d'un objet lors d'une tâche de catégorisation. Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 60, 285-293.
19. Slack, C. W. (1956). Familiar size as a cue to size in the presence of conflicting cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52, 184-198.
20. Spivey, M., Tyler, M., Richardson, D., & Young, E. (2000). Eye movements during comprehension of spoken scene descriptions. Dans Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, (pp. 487-492). Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Varela, F. J. (1989). Autonomie et connaissance. Paris : Seuil.
22. Wichmann, F. A., Sharpe, L. T., & Gegenfurtner, K. R. (2002). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 28, 509-520.
23. Wu, L., & Barsalou, L. W. (2001). Grounding concepts in perceptual simulation: I. Evidence from property generation.