Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-01-2014 | Original Article

Rapid processing of closure and viewpoint-invariant symmetry: behavioral criteria for feedforward processing

Auteurs: Filipp Schmidt, Thomas Schmidt

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 1/2014

Abstract

To pin down the processing characteristics of symmetry and closure in contour processing, we investigated their ability to activate rapid motor responses in a primed flanker task. In three experiments, participants selected as quickly and accurately as possible the one of two target contours possessing symmetry or closure. Target pairs were preceded by prime pairs whose spatial arrangement was consistent or inconsistent with respect to the required response. We tested for the efficiency and automaticity of symmetry and closure processing. For both cues, priming effects were present in full magnitude in the fastest motor responses consistent with a simple feedforward model. Priming effects from symmetry cues were independent of skewing and the orientation of their symmetry axis but sometimes failed to increase with increasing prime-target interval. We conclude that closure and (possibly) viewpoint-independent symmetry cues are extracted rapidly during the first feedforward wave of neuronal processing.

vorige artikel Social exclusion modulates pre-reflective interpersonal body representation

volgende artikel Beyond words: evidence for automatic language–gesture integration of symbolic gestures but not dynamic landscapes

Here, we focus on bilateral (mirror, reflection) symmetry only, because this form of symmetry is the most salient, most investigated and most relevant to humans (Treder, 2010). We will use the term “symmetry” to refer to “bilateral symmetry”.

Figure-ground segregation is the process by which the visual system distinguishes a figure from its background. It is crucial for object recognition and for physical interactions with our environment. The identification of an image area as a figure or background strongly depends on the visual attributes of that area. Importantly, an area that is symmetric or enclosed is more likely to be seen as a figure than an (adjacent) area that is asymmetric (e.g., Bahnsen, 1928; Machilsen, Pauwels, & Wagemans, 2009) or open (e.g., Koffka, 1935; Kovács & Julesz, 1993).

The notion of closure as a basic feature that is detected and processed by the visual system in a parallel fashion is not without controversy (e.g., Enns, 1986). Also, there is no unequivocal evidence that the processing of closure is automatic.

Note that the rapid-chase criteria do not guarantee that the system is strictly feedback-free (e.g., VanRullen & Koch, 2003) but establish it to be indistinguishable from a pure feedforward system.

While grouping strength can be easily matched for some grouping dimensions (e.g., similarity in brightness or size; Schmidt & Schmidt, submitted), matching is difficult to achieve with more complex grouping principles. Imagine, for example, participants adjusting the amount of symmetry in a given figure such that it is equal to the perceived amount of closure in another figure.

Note that errors in inconsistent trials represent motor responses that were misled by the conflicting prime information. This follows from response priming experiments with pointing responses, in which primes initiate a response toward them and sometimes provoke a full-fledged movement to their position (cf. Schmidt et al., 2006), and experiments measuring lateralized readiness potentials (Eimer & Schlaghecken, 1998; Leuthold & Kopp, 1998; Vath & Schmidt, 2007). Priming effects in error rates, as in response times, increase with prime-target SOA because the prime signal has more time to influence the response before the target signal becomes effective (cf. Schmidt et al., 2011; Vorberg et al., 2003).

Bahnsen, P. (1928). Eine Untersuchung über Symmetrie und Asymmetrie bei visuellen Wahrnehmungen. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 108, 129–154.

Barlow, H. B., & 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.PubMedCrossRef

Bauer, R., & Heinze, S. (2002). Contour integration in striate cortex. Classic cell responses or cooperative selection? Experimental Brain Research, 147, 145–152. doi:10.1007/s00221-002-1178-6.PubMedCrossRef

Baylis, C. G., & Driver, J. (1994). Parallel computation of symmetry but not repetition within visual shapes. Visual Cognition, 1, 377–400. doi:10.1080/13506289408401715.CrossRef

Bertamini, M. (2010). Sensitivity to reflection and translation is modulated by objectness. Perception, 39, 27–40. doi:10.1068/p6393.PubMedCrossRef

Bullier, J. (2001). Integrated model of visual processing. Brain Research Reviews, 36, 96–107. doi:10.1016/S0165-0173(01)00085-6.PubMedCrossRef

Carmody, D. P., Nodine, C. F., & Locher, P. J. (1977). Global detection of symmetry. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 45, 1267–1273. doi:10.2466/pms.1977.45.3f.1267.PubMedCrossRef

Cousineau, D. (2005). Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson’s method. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 1, 42–45.

Dakin, S. C., & Herbert, A. M. (1998). The spatial region of integration for visual symmetry detection. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 265, 659–664.PubMedCrossRef

Driver, J., Baylis, G. C., & Rafa, R. D. (1992). Preserved figure-ground segregation and symmetry perception in visual neglect. Nature, 360, 73–75. doi:10.1038/360073a0.PubMedCrossRef

Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (1998). Effects of masked stimuli on motor activation: behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1737–1747.PubMed

Elder, J. H., & Zucker, S. W. (1993). The effect of contour closure on the rapid discrimination of two-dimensional shapes. Vision Research, 33, 981–991. doi:10.1016/0042-6989(93)90080-G.PubMedCrossRef

Elder, J. H., & Zucker, S. W. (1998). Evidence for boundary-specific grouping. Vision Research, 38, 143–152. doi:10.1016/S0042-6989(97)00138-7.PubMedCrossRef

Enns, J. (1986). Seeing textons in context. Perception & Psychophysics, 39, 143–147. doi:10.3758/BF03211496.CrossRef

Enquist, M., & Arak, A. (1994). Symmetry, beauty and evolution. Nature, 372, 169–172. doi:10.1038/372169a0.PubMedCrossRef

Fisher, C. B., & Bornstein, M. H. (1982). Identification of symmetry: effects of stimulus orientation and head position. Perception & Psychophysics, 32, 443–448.

Friedenberg, J., & Bertamini, M. (2000). Contour symmetry detection: the influence of axis orientation and number of objects. Acta Psychologica, 105, 107–118. doi:10.1016/S0001-6918(00)00051-2.PubMedCrossRef

Garrigan, P., Fortunato, L., & LaSala, A. (2010). The effects of closure on contour shape learning. Journal of Vision, 10, 1167. doi:10.1167/10.7.1167.CrossRef

Höfel, L., & Jacobsen, T. (2007). Electrophysiological indices of processing aesthetics: Spontaneous or intentional processes? International Journal of Psychophysiology, 65, 20–31. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.02.007.PubMedCrossRef

Houtkamp, R., & Roelfsema, P. R. (2010). Parallel and serial grouping of image elements in visual perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1443–1459. doi:10.1037/a0020248.PubMed

Jacobsen, T., & Höfel, L. (2003). Descriptive and evaluative judgment processes: Behavioral and electrophysiological indices of processing symmetry and aesthetics. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 3, 289–299. doi:10.3758/CABN.3.4.289.CrossRef

Jenkins, B. (1983). Component processes in the perception of bilaterally symmetric dot textures. Perception & Psychophysics, 34, 433–440. doi:10.3758/BF03203058.CrossRef

Julesz, B. (2006). Foundations of cyclopean perception. Cambridge: MIT Press. (Original published in 1971).

Kanbe, F. (2008). Role of endpoints and closure in feature search. Japanese Psychological Research, 50, 145–151. doi:10.1111./j.1468-5884.2008.00371.x.CrossRef

Kiesel, A., Kunde, W., & Hoffmann, J. (2007). Mechanisms of subliminal response priming. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3, 307–315. doi:10.2478/v10053-008-0032-1.PubMedCentralCrossRef

Klotz, W., Heumann, M., Ansorge, U., & Neumann, O. (2007). Electrophysiological activation by masked primes: Independence of prime-related and target-related activities. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3, 449–465.PubMedCentralCrossRef

Koffka, K. (1935). Principles of Gestalt psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Koning, A., & Van Lier, R. (2006). No symmetry advantage when object matching involves accidental viewpoints. Psychological Research, 70, 52–58. doi:10.1007/s00426-004-0191-8.PubMedCrossRef

Koning, A., & Wagemans, J. (2009). Detection of symmetry and repetition in one and two objects: Structures versus strategies. Experimental Psychology, 56, 5–17. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.56.1.5.PubMedCrossRef

Kovács, I., & Julesz, B. (1993). A closed curve is much more than an incomplete one: Effect of closure in figure-ground segmentation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 90, 7495–7497.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Lachmann, T., & van Leeuwen, C. (2008). Goodness is central: Task-invariance of perceptual organization in a dual-task setting. Japanese Psychological Research, 50, 193–203.

Lamme, V. A. F., & Roelfsema, P. R. (2000). The distinct modes of vision offered by feedforward and recurrent processing. Trends in Neurosciences, 23, 571–579. doi:10.1016/S0166-2236(00)01657-X.PubMedCrossRef

Leuthold, H., & Kopp, B. (1998). Mechanisms of priming by masked stimuli: Inferences from event-related brain potentials. Psychological Science, 9, 263–269.CrossRef

Locher, P. J., & Wagemans, J. (1993). The effects of element type and spatial grouping on symmetry detection. Perception, 22, 565–587. doi:10.1068/p220565.PubMedCrossRef

Machilsen, B., Pauwels, M., & Wagemans, J. (2009). The role of vertical mirror symmetry in visual shape detection. Journal of Vision, 9(12), 11, 1–11. doi:10.1167/9.12.11.

Marino, A. C., & Scholl, B. J. (2005). The role of closure in defining the “objects” of object-based attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 1140–1149. doi:10.3758/BF03193547.CrossRef

Mathes, B., & Fahle, M. (2007). Closure facilitates contour integration. Vision Research, 47, 818–827. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2006.11.014.PubMedCrossRef

Mori, S. (1997). Effects of absolute and relative gap sizes in visual search for closure. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51, 112–124. doi:10.1037/1196-1961.51.2.112.PubMedCrossRef

Niimi, R., Watanabe, K., & Yokosawa, K. (2005). The role of visible persistence for perception of visual bilateral symmetry. Japanese Psychological Research, 47, 262–270. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5884.2005.00295.x.CrossRef

Niimi, R., & Yokosawa, K. (2008). Determining the orientation of depth-rotated familiar objects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 208–214. doi:10.3758/PBR.15.1.208.CrossRef

Norcia, A. M., Candy, T. R., Pettet, M. W., Vildavski, V. Y., & Tyler, C. W. (2002). Temporal dynamics of the human response to symmetry. Journal of Vision, 2, 132–139. doi:10.1167/2.2.1.PubMedCrossRef

Oka, S., Victor, J. D., Conte, M. M., & Yanagida, T. (2007). VEPs elicited by local correlations and global symmetry: characteristics and interactions. Vision Research, 47, 2212–2222. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2007.03.020.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Palmer, S. E., & Ghose, T. (2008). Extremal edges: A powerful cue to depth perception and figure-ground organization. Psychological Science, 19, 77–84.PubMedCrossRef

Palmer, S. E., & Hemenway, K. (1978). Orientation and symmetry: Effects of multiple, rotational, and near symmetries. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 691–702. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.4.4.691.PubMed

Pashler, H. (1990). Coordinate frame for symmetry detection and object recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 150–163. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.16.1.150.PubMed

Rainville, S. J. M., & Kingdom, F. A. A. (2000). The functional role of oriented spatial filters in the perception of mirror symmetry–psychophysics and modeling. Vision Research, 40, 2621–2644. doi:10.1016/S0042-6989(00)00110-3.PubMedCrossRef

Rock, I., & Leaman, R. (1963). An experimental analysis of visual symmetry. Acta Psychologica, 21, 171–183. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(63)90047-7.CrossRef

Roelfsema, P. R. (2006). Cortical algorithms for perceptual grouping. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 29, 203–227.PubMedCrossRef

Roland, P. E. (2010). Six principles of visual cortical dynamics. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 4, 28. doi:10.3389/fnsys.2010.00028.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Saarinen, J., & Levi, D. M. (1999). The effect of contour closure on shape perception. Spatial Vision, 2, 227–238. doi:10.1163/156856899X00139.CrossRef

Sasaki, Y., Vanduffel, W., Knutsen, T., Tyler, C., & Tootell, R. (2005). Symmetry activates extrastriate visual cortex in human and nonhuman primates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA), 102, 3159–3163. doi:10.1073/pnas.0500319102.CrossRef

Sawada, T., & Pizlo, Z. (2008). Detection of skewed symmetry. Journal of Vision, 8(5), 14, 1–18. doi:10.1167/8.5.14.

Schmidt, F., Haberkamp, A., & Schmidt, T. (2011a). Dos and don’ts in response priming. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 7, 120–131. doi:10.2478/v10053-008-0092-2.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Schmidt, T., Haberkamp, A., Veltkamp, G. M., Weber, A., Seydell-Greenwald, A., & Schmidt, F. (2011b). Visual processing in rapid-chase systems: Image processing, attention, and awareness. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 169. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00169.PubMedCentralPubMed

Schmidt, T., Niehaus, S., & Nagel, A. (2006). Primes and targets in rapid chases: Tracing sequential waves of motor activation. Behavioural Neuroscience, 120, 1005–1016. doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2006.11.044.CrossRef

Schmidt, T., & Schmidt, F. (2009). Processing of natural images is feedforward: A simple behavioral test. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71, 594–606.CrossRef

Schmidt, F., & Schmidt, T. (submitted). Grouping principles in direct competition.

Schumann, F. (1900). Beiträge zur Analyse der Gesichtswahrnehmungen. Erste Abhandlung. Einige Beobachtungen über die Zusammenfassung von Gesichtseindrücken zu Einheiten. Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane, 23, 1–32.

Seydell-Greenwald, A., & Schmidt, T. (2012). Rapid activation of motor responses by illusory contours. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1168–1182.PubMed

Tapia, E., Breitmeyer, B. G., & Shooner, C. R. (2010). Role of task-directed attention in nonconscious and conscious response priming by form and color. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 74–87.PubMed

Thorpe, S. J., Fize, D., & Marlot, C. (1996). Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature, 381, 520–522. doi:10.1038/381520a0.PubMedCrossRef

Treder, M. S. (2010). Behind the looking glass: a review on human symmetry perception. Symmetry, 2, 1510–1543. doi:10.3390/sym2031510.CrossRef

Treisman, A., & Paterson, R. (1984). Emergent features, attention, and object perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 12–31. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.10.1.12.PubMed

Treisman, A., & Souther, J. (1985). Search asymmetry: A diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 285–310. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.114.3.285.CrossRef

Tyler, C. W., Baseler, H. A., Kontsevich, L. L., Likova, L. T., Wade, A. R., & Wandell, B. A. (2005). Predominantly extra-retinotopic cortical response to pattern symmetry. Neuroimage, 24, 306–314. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.09.018.PubMedCrossRef

Van der Helm, P. A., & Leeuwenberg, E. L. J. (1996). Goodness of visual regularities: A nontransformational approach. Psychological Review, 103, 429–456.PubMedCrossRef

Van der Helm, P. A., & Leeuwenberg, E. L. J. (1999). A better approach to goodness: Reply to Wagemans (1999). Psychological Review, 106, 622–630.CrossRef

Van der Helm, P. A., & Treder, M. S. (2009). Detection of (anti)symmetry and (anti)repetition: Perceptual mechanisms versus cognitive strategies. Vision Research, 49, 2754–2763. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2009.08.015.PubMedCrossRef

VanRullen, R., & Koch, C. (2003). Is perception discrete or continuous? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 207–213. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00095-0.PubMedCrossRef

VanRullen, R., & Thorpe, S. J. (2001). Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Ultra-rapid visual categorization of natural and artifactual objects. Perception, 30, 655–668. doi:10.1068/p3029.PubMedCrossRef

Vath, N., & Schmidt, T. (2007). Tracing sequential waves of rapid visuomotor activation in lateralized readiness potentials. Neuroscience, 145, 197–208.PubMedCrossRef

Vorberg, D., Mattler, U., Heinecke, A., Schmidt, T., & Schwarzbach, J. (2003). Different time courses for visual perception and action priming. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 100, 6275–6280.CrossRef

Wagemans, J. (1993). Skewed symmetry: A nonaccidental property used to perceive visual forms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 364–380. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.19.2.364.PubMed

Wagemans, J. (1995). Detection of visual symmetries. Spatial Vision, 9, 9–32. doi:10.1163/156856895X00098.PubMedCrossRef

Wagemans, J. (1997). Characteristics and models of human symmetry detection. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1, 346–352. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(97)01105-4.PubMedCrossRef

Wagemans, J., Van Gool, L., & d’Ydewalle, G. (1991). Detection of symmetry in tachistoscopically presented dot patterns: Effects of multiple axes and skewing. Perception & Psychophysics, 50, 413–427. doi:10.3758/BF03205058.CrossRef

Wagemans, J., Van Gool, L., & D’Ydewalle, G. (1992). Orientational effects and component processes in symmetry detection. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 44, 475–508. doi:10.1080/14640749208401295.CrossRef

Wagemans, J., Van Gool, L., Swinnen, V., & Van Horebeek, J. (1993). Higher-order structure in regularity detection. Vision Research, 33, 1067–1088. doi:10.1016/0042-6989(93)90241-N.PubMedCrossRef

Wenderoth, P. (1994). The salience of vertical symmetry. Perception, 23, 221–236. doi:10.1068/p230221.PubMedCrossRef

Wenderoth, P. (1997). The effects on bilateral symmetry detection of multiple symmetry, near symmetry, and axis orientation. Perception, 26, 891–904. doi:10.1068/p260891.PubMedCrossRef

Wenderoth, P. (2000). The differential effects of simultaneous and successive cueing on the detection of bilateral symmetry in dot patterns. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 53, 165–190.

Wenderoth, P., & Welsh, S. (1998). Effects of pattern orientation and number of symmetry axes on the detection of mirror symmetry in dot and solid patterns. Perception, 27, 965–976. doi:10.1068/p270965.PubMedCrossRef

Wertheimer, M. (1923). Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt, II. Psychologische Forschung, 4, 301–350.CrossRef

Zipser, K., Lamme, V. A. F., & Schiller, P. H. (1996). Contextual modulation in primary visual cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience, 16, 7376–7389.PubMed

Titel: Rapid processing of closure and viewpoint-invariant symmetry: behavioral criteria for feedforward processing
Auteurs: Filipp Schmidt
Thomas Schmidt
Publicatiedatum: 01-01-2014
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 1/2014
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-013-0478-8

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1/2014

Evidence for graded central processing resources in a sequential movement task

“Deafness” effects in detecting alterations to auditory feedback during sequence production

Subjective criteria and illusions in visual testing: some methodological limitations

Tool characteristics in imagery of tool actions

Getting a tool gives wings: overestimation of tool-related benefits in a motor imagery task and a decision task

Beyond words: evidence for automatic language–gesture integration of symbolic gestures but not dynamic landscapes