How do nonhuman animals perceptually integrate figural fragments?

Japanese Psychological Research

Volumn 46, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 154-169

  Fujita, Kazuo ^a  

^a KYOTO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Amodal completion; Birds; Nonhuman primates; Perceptual organization

Indexed keywords

EID: 5644236657     PISSN: 00215368     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5584.2004.00248.x     Document Type: Review

References (61)

1. Adachi, I., & Fujita, K. (2004) How do pigeons categorize human "faces"? Manuscript submitted for publication.
2. Adachi, I., Fujita, K., Kuwahata, H., & Ishikawa, S. (2003). Perception of biological motion in infant macaques. In M. Tomonaga, M. Tanaka & T. Matsuzawa (Eds.), Development of cognition and behavior of chimpanzees (pp. 333-336). Kyoto: Kyoto University Press. (In Japanese.)
3. Albert, M. K. (2001). Surface perception and the generic view principle. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 197-203.
4. Bertenthal, B. I. (1993). Infants' perception of biomechanical motions: Intrinsic image and knowledge-based constraints. In C. Granrud (Ed.), Visual perception and cognition in infancy (pp. 175-214). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Blough, D. S. (1984). Form recognition in pigeons. In H. L. Roitblat, T. G. Bever & H. S. Terrace (Eds.), Animal cognition (pp. 277-289). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Bravo, M., Blake, R., & Morrison, S. (1988). Cats see subjective contours. Vision Research, 28, 861-865.
7. Cerella, J. (1977). Absence of perspective processing in the pigeon. Pattern Recognition, 9, 65-68.
8. Cerella, J. (1980). The pigeons's analysis of pictures. Pattern Recognition, 12, 1-6.
9. Cerella, J. (1990). Shape constancy in the pigeon: The perspective transformations decomposed. In M. L. Commons, R. J. Herrnstein, S. M. Kosslyn & D. B. Mumford (Eds.), Quantitative Analyses of Behavior (Vol. 8, pp. 145-163). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
10. Craton, L. G. (1996). The development of perceptual completion abilities: Infants' perception of stationary, partially occluded objects. Child Development, 67, 890-904.
11. De Weerd, P., Vandenbussche, E., De Bruyn, B., & Orban, G. A. (1990). Illusory contour orientation discrimination in the cat. Behavioral Brain Research, 39, 1-17.
12. Deruelle, C., Barbet, I., Dépy, D., & Fagot, J. (2000). Perception of partly occluded figures by baboons (Papio papio). Percetpion, 29, 1483-1497.
13. Deruelle, C., & Fagot, J. (1998). Visual search for global/local stimulus features in humans and baboons. Psychonomic Bulletin the Review, 5, 476-481.
14. DiPietro, N., Wasserman, E. A., & Young, M. E. (2002). Effects of occlusion on pigeons' visual object recognition. Perception, 31, 1299-1312.
15. Dumans, C., & Wilkie, D. M. (1995). Object permanence in ring doves (Streptopelia risoria). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 109, 142-150.
16. Fagot, J., & Tomonaga, M. (1999). Global and local processing in humans (Homo sapiens) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): Use of a visual search task with compound stimuli. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 113, 3-12.
17. Fagot, J., & Tomonaga, M. (2001). Effects of element separation on perceptual grouping by humans (Homo sapiens) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): Perception of Kanizsa illusory figures. Animal Cognition, 4, 171-177.
18. Forkman, B. (1998). Hens use occlusion to judge depth in a two-dimensional picture. Perception, 27, 861-867.
19. Fujita, K. (2000). Recognition of figures by nonhuman primates. Japan Scientific Monthly, 53, 1074-1081. (In Japanese.)
20. Fujita, K. (2001a). What you see is different from what I see: Species differences in visual perception. In T. Matsuzawa (Ed.), Primate origins of human cognition and behavior (pp. 29-54). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
21. Fujita, K. (2001b). Perceptual completion in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) and pigeons (Columba livia). Perception and Psychophysics, 63, 115-125.
22. Fujita, K., & Giersch, A. (2004). What perceptual rules capuchin monkeys follow in completing partly occluded figures. Manuscript submitted for publication.
23. Fujita, K., Matsuzawa, T., & Tokuhisa, A. (2000). Spatio-temporal boundary formation in chimpanzees. Paper Presented at the 7th International Conference on Comparative Cognition, Melbourne, FL, March 18, 2000.
24. Gunderson, V. M., Yonas, A., Sargent, P. L., & Grant-Webster, K. S. (1993). Infant macaque monkeys respond to pictorial depth. Psychological Science, 4, 93-98.
25. Ishikawa, S., Fujita, K., & Kuwahata, H. (2003). Perception of biological motion. In M. Tomonaga, M. Tanaka & T. Matsuzawa (Eds.), Development of cognition and behavior of chimpanzees (pp. 77-82). Kyoto: Kyoto University Press. (In Japanese.)
26. Jitsumori, M., Natori, M., & Okuyama, K. (1999). Recognition of moving video images of conspecifics by pigeons: effects of individuals, static and dynamic motion cues, and movement. Animal Learning and Behavior, 27, 303-315.
27. Johansson, G. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception and Psychophysics, 14, 201-211.
28. Johnson, M. H., Dziurawiec, S., Ellis, H. D., & Morton, J. (1991). Newborns preferential tracking of faces and its subsequent decline. Cognition, 40, 1-19.
29. Johnson, M. H., & Morton, J. (1991). Biology and cognitive development: the case of face recognition. Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.
30. Kanizsa, G. (1979). Organization in vision: Essays on Gestalt perception. New York: Praeger Publishers.
31. Kanizsa, G., Renzi, P., Conte, S., Compostela, C., & Guerani, L. (1993). Amodal completion in mouse vision. Perception, 22, 713-721.
32. Kellman, P. J. (1996). The origins of object perception. In R. Gelman, & T. K.-F. Au (Eds.), Perceptual and cognitive development (pp. 3-48.) New York: Academic Press.
33. Kellman, P. J., & Shipley, T. F. (1991). A theory of visual interpolation in object perception. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 141-221.
34. Kellman, P. J., & Spelke, E. S. (1983). Perception of partly occluded objects in infancy. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 483-524.
35. Kuwahata, H., Ishikawa, S., & Fujita, K. (2002). Development of the recognition of social objects in primates. Japanese Psychological Review, 45, 367-381. (In Japanese with English summary.)
36. 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.
37. Myowa-Yamakoshi, M., & Matsuzawa, T. (2001). Development of face recognition in an infant gibbon (Hylobates agilis). Infant Behavior and Development, 24, 215-227.
38. Nagasaka, Y., & Osada, Y. (1996). Squirrel monkeys can see subjective contours. Investigative Opthalmology and Visual Science, 37, S173.
39. Nagasaka, Y., & Osada, Y. (2000). Subjective contours, amodal completion, and transparency in animals. Japanese Journal of Animal Psychology, 50, 61-73.
40. Navon, D. (1977). Forest before the tree: the precedence of global features in visua perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 353-383.
41. Nieder, A. (2002). Seeing more than meets the eye: Processing of illusory contours in animals. Journal of Comparative Physiology, A188, 249-260.
42. Nieder, A., & Wagner, H. (1999). Perception and neuronal coding of subjective contours in the owl. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 660-663.
43. Okanoya, K., & Takahashi, M. (2000). Shikaku-teki hokan e no seitaigaku-teki apuroochi (Ecological approach to visual completion) Reports of the Grant-in-aid for Scientific Research for Priority Areas, "Kokoro no hattatsu: ninchi-teki seicho no kikoo", 1999, 34-41. (In Japanese.)
44. Osada, Y., & Schiller, P. H. (1996). Rhesus monkeys can see subjective contours. Investigative Opthalmology and Visual Science, 37, S174.
45. Plowright, C. M. S., Reid, S., & Kilian, T. (1998). Finding hidden food: behavior on visible displacement tasks by mynahs (Gracula religiosa) and pigeons (Columba livia). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 112, 13-25.
46. Rauschenberger, R., & Yantis, S. (2001). Masking unveils pre-amodal completion representation in visual search. Nature, 410, 369-372.
47. Regolin, L., & Vallortigara, G. (1995). Perception of partly occluded objects by young chicks. Perception and Psychophysics, 57, 971-976.
48. Sato, A., Kanazawa, S., & Fujita, K. (1997). Perception of object unity in a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Japanese Psychological Research, 39, 191-199.
49. Sekuler, A. B., Lee, J. A. J., & Shettleworth, S. J. (1996). Pigeons do not complete partly occluded figures. Perception, 25, 1109-1120.
50. Shimizu, T. (1998). Conspecific recognition in pigeons (Columba livia) using dynamic video images. Behaviour, 135, 43-53.
51. Shipley, T., & Kellman, P. J. (1994). Spatiotemporal boundary formation: boundary, form, and motion perception from transformations of surface elements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 123, 3-20.
52. Sugita, Y. (1999). Grouping of image fragments in primary visual cortex. Nature, 401, 269-272.
53. Ushitani & Fujita (2002). Recognition of partly occluded ecologically significant stimuli by pigeons. Paper presented at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Abstracts, p. 100.
54. Ushitani, T., Fujita, K., & Sato, A. (2004). Perceptual organization of motions in pigeons (Columba livia). Japanese Psychological Research, 46, 170-181.
55. Ushitani, T., Fujita, K., & Yamanaka, R. (2001). Do pigeons (Columba livia) perceive object unity? Animal Cognition, 4, 153-161.
56. Van Hateren, J. H., Srinivasan, M. V., & Wait, P. B. (1990). Pattern recognition in bees: orientation discrimination. Journal of Comparative Physiology, A167, 649-654.
57. Von der Heydt, R., Peterhans, E., & Baumgartner, G. (1984). Illusory contours and cortical neuron responses. Science, 224, 1260-1262.
58. Watanabe, S. (2001). Dicscrimination of cartoons and photographs in pigeons: Effect of scrambling of elements. Behavioural Processes, 53, 3-9.
59. 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.
60. Yonas, A., Cleaves, W., & Pettersen, L. (1978). Development of sensitivity to pictorial depth. Science, 200, 77-79.
61. Zanforlin, M. (1981). Visual perception of complex forms (anomalous surfaces) in chicks. Italian Journal of Psychology, 1, 1-16.