Evaluating the contribution of shape attributes to recognition using the minimal transient discrete cue protocol

Behavioral and Brain Functions

Volumn 8, Issue , 2012, Pages

  Greene, Ernest ^a   Ogden, R T ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

Author keywords

Contour attributes; Shape encoding; Shape recognition

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; BRAIN FUNCTION; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LIGHT EMITTING DIODE; LIGHT INTERCEPTION; MINIMAL TRANSIENT DISCRETE CUE; OBJECT RELATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECOGNITION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SHAPE DISCRIMINATION; STIMULUS;

ADULT; CUES; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 84868638769     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17449081     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1744-9081-8-53     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Treisman A. The perception of features and objects. Attention: selection, awareness, and control: a tribute to Donald Broadbent 1993, 5-35. Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press, Baddeley AD, Weiskrantz L.
2. Nijboer TCW, Kanai R, de Haan EHF, et al. Recognizing the forest, but not the trees: an effect of color on scene perception and recognition. Conscious Cognit 2007, 17(3):741-752.
3. Elder JH, Velisavljevic L. Cue dynamics underlying rapid detection of animals in natural scenes. J Vision 2009, 9(7):1-20. 7.
4. Alexander RG, Zelinsky GJ. Visual similarity effects in categorical search. J Vision 2011, 11(9):1-15.
5. Li Y, Pizlo Z. Depth cues versus the simplicity principle in 3D shape perception. Topics Cognit Sci 2011, 3(4):667-685.
6. Attneave F. Some informational aspects of visual perception. Psychol Rev 1954, 61:183-193.
7. Attneave F. Physical determinants of the judged complexity of shapes. J Exp Psychol 1957, 53:221-227.
8. Palmer SE. Vision science: photons to phenomenology 1999, 433-443. MIT Press.
9. Wagemans J, De Winder J, Op de Beeck HP, et al. Identification of everyday objecs on the basis of silhouettes and outline versions. Perception 2008, 37(2):207-244. 10.1068/p5825, 18456925.
10. Greene E. Recognition of objects displayed with incomplete sets of discrete boundary dots. Percept Motor Skills 2007, 104:1043-1059.
11. Greene E. Additional evidence that contour attributes are not essential cues for object recognition. Behav Brain Funct 2008, 4:26. 10.1186/1744-9081-4-26, 2467424, 18593469.
12. Greene E. Simultaneity in the millisecond range as a requirement for effective shape recognition. Behav Brain Funct 2006, 2:38. 10.1186/1744-9081-2-38, 1693915, 17134493.
13. Greene E. Information persistence in the integration of partial cues for object recognition. Percept Psychophys 2007, 69:772-784. 10.3758/BF03193778, 17929699.
14. Greene E. The integration window for shape cues is a function of ambient illumination. Behav Brain Funct 2007, 3:15. 10.1186/1744-9081-3-15, 1838908, 17359541.
15. Greene E. Spatial and temporal proximity as factors in shape recognition. Behav Brain Funct 2007, 3:27. 10.1186/1744-9081-3-27, 1894631, 17550614.
16. Greene E. Retinal encoding of ultrabrief shape recognition cues. PLoS One 2007, 2:9.
17. Corbell J-C, Archambault A. The Macmillan visual dictionary 1992, Macmillan Publishing.
18. Hubel DH, Wiesel TN. Receptive fields of single neurons in the cat's striate cortex. J Physiol (Lond) 1959, 148:574-591.
19. Hubel DH, Wiesel TN. Receptive fields, binocular interactions and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex. J Physiol (Lond) 1962, 160:106-154.
20. Sceniak MP, Hawken MJ, Shapley R. Visual spatial characterization of macaque V1 neurons. J Neurophysiol 2001, 85:1873-1887.
21. Norman JF, Phillips F, Ross HE. Information concentration along the boundary contours of naturally shaped solid objects. Perception 2001, 30:1285-1294. 10.1068/p3272, 11768484.
22. Feldman J, Singh M. Information along contours and object boundaries. Psychol Rev 2005, 112:243-252.
23. De Winter J, Wagemans J. Perceptual saliency of points along the contour of everyday objects: a large-scale study. Percept Psychophys 2008, 70:50-64. 10.3758/PP.70.1.50, 18306960.
24. Wurtz RH, Kandel ER. Central visual pathways. Principles of Neural Science 2000, 532-545. McGraw Hill, Kandel ER, Schwartz JH, Jessell TM, 4th.
25. Marr D, Nishihara HK. Visual information processing: artificial intelligence and the sensorium of sight. Technol Rev 1978, 81:28-49.