The role of convexity in perception of symmetry and in visual short-term memory

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 66, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 767-785

  Bertamini, Marco ^a   Helmy, Mai Salah ^a   Hulleman, Johan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Concavity; Convexity; Symmetry; Visual short term memory

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; SHORT TERM MEMORY; STATISTICAL BIAS; STUDENT; TIME; UNIVERSITY;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; FORM PERCEPTION; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; MEMORY, SHORT-TERM; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; SIGNAL DETECTION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; STUDENTS; TIME FACTORS; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 84875926207     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2012.717953     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Arnheim, R. (1954). Art and visual perception: A psychology of the creative Eye. Berkeley: University of California Press.
2. Barenholtz, E., Cohen, E. H., Feldman, J. and Singh, M. 2003. Detection of change in shape: An advantage for concavities. Cognition, 89(1): 1-9. (doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00068-4)
3. Barenholtz, E. and Feldman, J. 2003. Visual comparisons within and between object parts: Evidence for a single-part superiority effect. Vision Research, 43: 1655-1666. (doi:10.1016/S0042-6989(03)00166-4)
4. Barlow, H. B. and Reeves, B. C. 1979. The versatility and absolute efficiency of detecting mirror symmetry in random dot displays. Vision Research, 19: 783-793. (doi:10.1016/0042-6989(79)90154-8)
5. Bell, J., Gheorghiu, E., & Kingdom, F. A. A. (2009). Orientation tuning of curvature adaptation reveals both curvature-polarity-selective and non-selective mechanisms. Journal of Vision, 9(12), 3.1-11. doi:10.1167/9.12.3.
6. Bell, J., Hancock, S., Kingdom, F. A. A. and Peirce, J. W. 2010. Global shape processing: Which parts form the whole?. Journal of Vision, 10(6) 16, 1--13. doi:10.1167/10.6.16
7. Bertamini, M. 2001. The importance of being convex: An advantage for convexity when judging position. Perception, 30: 1295-1310. (doi:10.1068/p3197)
8. Bertamini, M. 2008. Detection of convexity and concavity in context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 34(4): 775-789. (doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.4.775)
9. Bertamini, M. 2010. Sensitivity to reflection and translation is modulated by objectness. Perception, 39(1): 27-40. (doi:10.1068/p6393)
10. Bertamini, M. and Croucher, C. J. 2003. The shape of holes. Cognition, 87: 33-54. (doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00183-X)
11. Bertamini, M. and Farrant, T. 2006. The perceived structural shape of thin (wire-like) objects is different from that of silhouettes. Perception, 35: 1679-1692. (doi:10.1068/p5534)
12. Bertamini, M., & Lawson, R. (2006). Visual search for a circular region perceived as a figure versus as a hole: Evidence of the importance of part structure. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 776-791.
13. Bruce, V. G. and Morgan, M. J. 1975. Violations of symmetry and repetition in visual patterns. Perception, 4: 239-249. (doi:10.1068/p040239)
14. Cohen, E. H., Barenholtz, E., Singh, M. and Feldman, J. 2005. What change detection tells us about the visual representation of shape. Journal of Vision, 5: 313-321. (doi:10.1167/5.4.3)
15. Connor, C. E. (2004). Shape dimensions and object primitives. In L. M. Chalupa & J. S. Werner (Eds.), The visual neurosciences (pp. 1080-1089). London: MIT Press.
16. Cowan, N. 2001. The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1): 87-114. (doi:10.1017/S0140525X01003922)
17. Elder, J. H. and Zucker, S. W. 1993. The effect of contour closure on the rapid discrimination of two-dimensional shapes. Vision Research, 33(7): 981-991. (doi:10.1016/0042-6989(93)90080-G)
18. Gibson, B. S. 1994. Visual attention and objects: One versus two or convex versus concave?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20(1): 203-207. (doi:10.1037/0096-1523.20.1.203)
19. Haushofer, J., Baker, C. I., Livingstone, M. S. and Kanwisher, N. 2008. Privileged coding of convex shapes in human object-selective cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 100: 753-762. (doi:10.1152/jn.90310.2008)
20. Hill, H. and Bruce, V. 1993. Independent effects of lighting, orientation, and stereopsis on the hollow-face illusion. Perception, 22: 887-897. (doi:10.1068/p220887)
21. Hoffman, D. D. and Richards, W. 1984. Parts of recognition. Cognition, 18: 65-96. (doi:10.1016/0010-0277(84)90022-2)
22. Hulleman, J. and Olivers, C. N. L. 2007. Concavities count for less in symmetry perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14: 1212-1217. (doi:10.3758/BF03193115)
23. Hulleman, J., te Winkel, W. and Boselie, F. 2000. Concavities as basic features in visual search: Evidence from search asymmetries. Perception & Psychophysics, 62(1): 162-174. (doi:10.3758/BF03212069)
24. Humphreys, G. W., & Müller, H. (2000). A search asymmetry reversed by figure-ground assignement. Psychological Science, 11(3), 196-201.
25. Johnston, A., Hill, H. and Carman, N. 1992. Recognising faces: Effects of lighting direction, inversion and brightness reversal. Perception, 21: 365-375. (doi:10.1068/p210365)
26. Kanizsa, G., & Gerbino, W. (1976). Convexity and symmetry in figure-ground organization. In Henle, M. (Ed.), Vision and artifact (pp. 25-32). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Co.
27. Koenderink, J. 1984. What does the occluding contour tell us about solid shape?. Perception, 13: 321-330. (doi:10.1068/p130321)
28. Koenderink, J. J. 1990. Solid shape, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Langer, M. S. and Bülthoff, H. H. 2001. A prior for global convexity in local shape-from-shading. Perception, 30: 403-410. (doi:10.1068/p3178)
30. Luck, S. J. and Vogel, E. K. 1997. The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390: 279-281. (doi:10.1038/36846)
31. Mach, E. 1959. The analysis of sensations, and the relation of the physical to the psychical, New York, NY: Dover. (Original work in German published 1897)
32. Macmillan, N. A. and Creelman, C. D. 1991. Detection theory: A user's guide, Cambridge. UK: Cambridge University Press.
33. Rubin, E. (1958). Figure and ground. In D. C. Beardslee & M. Wertheimer (Eds.), Readings in perception (pp. 194-203). Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand (Original work published 1915).
34. Suzuki, S. 2003. Attentional selection of overlapped shapes: A study using brief shape aftereffects. Vision Research, 43(5): 549-561. (doi:10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00683-1)
35. Suzuki, S. and Cavanagh, P. 1998. A shape-contrast effect for briefly presented stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24(5): 1-27. (doi:10.1037/0096-1523.24.5.1315)
36. Vandekerckhove, J., Panis, S. and Wagemans, J. 2007. The concavity effect is a compound of local and global effects. Perception & Psychophysics, 69: 1253-1260. (doi:10.3758/BF03193960)