Orientation-invariant object recognition: evidence from repetition blindness
Section snippets
Experiment 1
Experiment 1 investigated whether RB occurs for two repeated objects that were either in identical orientations (both upright) or differed by 30, 60, 90 or 180°. The task required participants to report three pictures presented in rapid succession, for 100 ms each. The critical items were the first picture (C1, or critical item 1) and the third picture (C2, or critical item 2); these were either the same object (repeated condition) or different objects (non-repeated condition). The intervening
Experiment 2
This experiment investigated whether increasing the orientation processing demands of the task would make it more difficult for subjects to use orientation as a way of differentiating two repeated objects, resulting in robust RB even for objects rotated by 180°. The orientation processing demands of the task were increased by presenting the intervening item (that presented between C1 and C2) rotated away from the upright; the experiment was otherwise identical to Experiment 1. This means that,
Experiment 3
The results of the first two experiments suggest that the upright (0°) and upside-down (180°) orientations may be processed more easily than other orientations (30, 60, 90°). In this experiment, we investigated whether the accuracy with which people explicitly judge the orientation of a briefly presented object depends on the orientation of the object. Since there was no evidence from 1 Experiment 1, 2 Experiment 2 of any particular differences amongst the orientations of 30, 60 and 90°, in
General discussion
The present study used a RB paradigm to investigate whether the object representations generated outside conscious awareness are orientation-dependent or orientation-invariant. The principal finding was that RB occurred across changes in object orientation ranging from 30 to 180°. These results replicate and extend those reported by Kanwisher et al. (1999) and provide support for the suggestion that these object representations are orientation-invariant. Our results also revealed that
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by an Early Career Researcher Grant from Macquarie University. Irina Harris was supported by an ARC Australian Post-doctoral Fellowship and Paul Dux was supported by an Australian Post-graduate Award. We thank Leila Petit and Stacey Kuan for assistance in running the experiments; Justin Harris, Mike Corballis and Steve Mondy for discussion of the research and comments on the manuscript; and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive criticisms.
References (43)
Repetition blindness between visually different items: The case of pictures and words
Cognition
(1994)- et al.
The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information
Cognitive Psychology
(1992) Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation
Cognition
(1987)- et al.
Neuronal representation of object orientation
Neuropsychologia
(2000) - et al.
Recognition thresholds for plane-rotated pictures of familiar objects
Acta Psychologica
(2003) - et al.
Mental rotation and orientation-dependence in shape recognition
Cognitive Psychology
(1989) - et al.
Agnosia for object orientation: Implications for theories of object recognition
Neuropsychologia
(1997) - et al.
Object recognition without knowledge of object orientation
Cortex
(1995) Aligning pictorial descriptions: An approach to object recognition
Cognition
(1989)- et al.
Repetition blindness for pseudoobject pictures
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
(1997)
Effect of image orientation and size on object recognition: Responses of single units in the macaque monkey temporal cortex
Cognitive Neuropsychology
Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding
Psychological Review
Recognizing depth-rotated objects: Evidence and conditions for three-dimensional view-point invariance
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition
Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA
Types and tokens in visual processing: A double dissociation between the attentional blink and repetition blindness
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Seeing two as one: Linking apparent motion and repetition blindness
Psychological Science
Recognition of disoriented shapes
Psychological Review
Decisions about identity and orientation of rotated letters and digits
Memory and Cognition
On the perception of objects and their orientations
Spatial Vision
Rotating objects to determine orientation, not identity: Evidence from a backward-masking/dual-task procedure
Perception and Psychophysics
Cited by (45)
Comparable repetition blindness effect in patients with schizophrenia
2023, Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental PsychiatryCitation Excerpt :For example, when reading the sentence “I love walking in the rain”, many people do not notice the second instance of the word “the”. RB is a powerful effect and has been demonstrated in many different experimental tasks with a variety of stimuli such as words, letters, and colors (Chialant & Caramazza, 1997; de Fockert & Fox, 2001; Harris & Dux, 2005; Harris et al., 2012; Kanwisher & Potter, 1989, 1990; Morris & Still, 2008; Park & Kanwisher, 1994). RB effect is measured by a difference of performance, i.e., either error rates or correct response rates, of repeated items in comparison to unrepeated items.
The role of sensorimotor processes in social group contagion
2018, Cognitive PsychologyCitation Excerpt :In contrast, in naturalistic situations, different agents tend to be oriented in different directions. However, recent meta-analytic work has revealed that orientation does not modulate automatic imitation (Cracco et al., 2018), which is presumably caused by extensive exposure to the actions of others from various viewpoints (Cracco et al., 2018), and is consistent with evidence that object representations are orientation invariant as well (Harris & Dux, 2005). The notion that orientation does not influence the relation between group size and automatic imitation is further supported by previous work in which two identical observed actions were found to produce a stronger motor trigger than a single observed actions regardless of whether the actions were presented in a third- (Cracco et al., 2015) or first-person perspective (Cracco et al., 2016).
Is perception of placement universal? A mixed methods perspective on linguistic relativity
2018, LinguaCitation Excerpt :This is in line with Connell (2005, 2007) who argues that psychophysically, properties such as shape or size are more salient than object color or orientation. Harris and Dux (2005) have also shown that object recognition was not affected by object orientation. Orientation simulation studies have only investigated implied orientation so far and did not consider explicit marking of orientation within a language, as is the case with the German placement verbs legen [lay] and stellen [lay].
Visual field asymmetries in object individuation
2015, Consciousness and CognitionCitation Excerpt :That is, in this case there is both a change in the type representation and competition at the level of access to awareness. RB has been demonstrated for a variety of stimuli, including letters, words and pictures of objects (Harris & Dux, 2005a, 2005b; Hayward, Zhou, Man, & Harris, 2010; Kanwisher, 1987; Kanwisher & Potter, 1990; Kanwisher, Yin, & Wojciulik, 1999; Morris & Still, 2008). It occurs for both identical repetitions of items and for physically dissimilar items, such as letters of different cases (Corballis & Armstrong, 2007; Kanwisher, 1987), orthographically similar words (Bavelier, Prasada, & Segui, 1994; Kanwisher & Potter, 1990) and objects in different orientations (Harris & Dux, 2005a, 2005b; Hayward et al., 2010), as well as between items presented in different formats, such as words and pictures (Bavelier, 1994).
Parietal and frontal object areas underlie perception of object orientation in depth
2011, Neuroscience Letters