Three experiments provide evidence that the perceived similarity between two images is systematically affected by the inherent direction of a transformation that links the two. Participants were shown short animations morphing one object into another from the same basic category. They were then asked to make directional similarity judgments (“How similar is object A to object B?”) for two stationary images drawn from the morph continuum. Across three experiments, similarity ratings for identical comparisons were higher when the reference object, B, had appeared before the comparison object, A, in the preceding morph sequence. This response to dynamic transformational sequences is in accordance with the view that similarity depends on the ease of transformation between object representations and that transformations between objects in categorization and object recognition are psychologically real.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarlowH.HillR. (1963). Evidence for a physiological explanation for the waterfall phenomenon and figural aftereffects. Nature, 200, 1345–1347.
2.
BertaminiM. (1993). Memory for positions and dynamic representations. Memory & Cognition, 21, 449–457.
3.
CatramboneR.BeikeD.NiedenthalP. (1996). Is the self-concept a habitual referent in judgments of similarity?Psychological Science, 7, 158–163.
EstesW.K. (1994). Classification and cognition. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
6.
FinkeR.A.FreydJ.J. (1985). Transformations of visual memory induced by implied motions of pattern elements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 780–794.
7.
FoxC.J.BartonJ.J.S. (2007). What is adapted in face adaptation? The neural representations of expression in the human visual system. Brain Research, 1127, 80–89.
8.
FreydJ.J.FinkeR.A. (1984). Representational momentum. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 126–132.
9.
GauthierI.TarrM.J. (1997). Orientation priming of novel shapes in the context of viewpoint-dependent recognition. Perception, 26, 51–73.
10.
GrafM. (2002). Form, space and object: Geometrical transformations in object recognition and categorization. Berlin, Germany: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Berlin.
GrafM. (in press). Categorization and object shape. In GlatzederB.von MüllerA.GoelV. (Eds.), Understanding thinking: Vol. II. Towards a theory of thinking: Structures, dynamics, genesis. Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag.
13.
GrafM.BundesenC.SchneiderW.X. (2008). Topological transformations and object shape. Manuscript submitted for publication.
14.
GrafM.KapingD.BülthoffH.H. (2005). Orientation congruency effects for familiar objects: Coordinate transformations in object recognition. Psychological Science, 16, 214–221.
15.
GrafM.ReitznerB.CorvesC.CasileA.GieseM.PrinzW. (2007). Predicting point-light actions in real-time. NeuroImage, 36, T22–T32.
16.
HahnU.BaileyT.M. (2005). What makes words sound similar?Cognition, 97, 227–267.
17.
HahnU.ChaterN.RichardsonL.B. (2003). Similarity as transformation. Cognition, 87, 1–32.
18.
HockemaS.A.BlairM.R.GoldstoneR.L. (2005). Differentiation for novel dimensions. InProceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 953–958). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
JolicoeurP. (1990). Orientation congruency effects on the identification of disoriented shapes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 351–364.
20.
JolicoeurP. (1992). Orientation congruency effects in visual search. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 46, 280–305.
21.
KohnA.MovshonJ.A. (2003). Neuronal adaptation to visual motion in area MT of the macaque. Neuron, 39, 681–691.
SalinasE.SejnowskiT.J. (2001). Gain modulation in the central nervous system: Where behavior, neurophysiology, and computation meet. The Neuroscientist, 7, 430–440.
31.
ShepardR.N. (1957). Stimulus and response generalization: A stochastic model relating generalization to distance in psychological space. Psychometrika, 22, 325–345.
32.
ShepardR.N. (1987). Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. Science, 237, 1317–1323.
33.
TarrM.J. (2003). Visual object recognition: Can a single mechanism suffice? In PetersonM.A.RhodesG. (Eds.), Perception of faces, objects, and scenes: Analytic and holistic processes (pp. 177–211). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
34.
TarrM.J.GauthierI. (1998). Do viewpoint-dependent mechanisms generalize across members of a class?Cognition, 67, 71–109.
35.
TrojeN.F.SadrJ.GeyerH.NakayamaK. (2006). Adaptation aftereffects in the perception of gender from biological motion. Journal of Vision, 6, 850–857.
36.
TverskyA. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84, 327–352.
37.
TverskyA.GatiI. (1978). Studies of similarity. In RoschE.LloydB. (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 79–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38.
WebsterM.A.KapingD.MizokamiY.DuhamelP. (2004). Adaptation to natural facial categories. Nature, 428, 557–561.
39.
YamashitaJ.A.HardyJ.L.De ValoisK.K.WebsterM.A. (2005). Stimulus selectivity of figural aftereffects for faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 420–437.
40.
ZakiS.R.HomaD. (1999). Concepts and transformational knowledge. Cognitive Psychology, 39, 69–115.
