Four experiments examined whether reported looming of cave paintings and petroglyphs was due to representational momentum. Participants viewed a target photograph of a cave painting or petroglyph, and then a probe photograph of the same cave painting or petroglyph was presented. The viewpoint in the probe was closer, the same as, or farther than the viewpoint in the target. Participants judged if the probe viewpoint was (a) the same as or different from the target viewpoint or (b) closer, the same distance as, or farther than the target viewpoint. Experiments 1, 2, 3A, and 3B presented photographs of objects and entities, and Experiments 4A and 4B presented photographs of handprints and stencils. In all experiments, responses were not consistent with representational momentum, but were consistent with boundary extension. It is suggested perception of looming arises with continued inspection and reflects a mismatch between previously perceived (displaced) and currently perceived information.
BednarikR. G. (2007) Rock art science: The scientific study of palaeoart, New Delhi, India: Aryan Books.
2.
BerlyneD. E. (1971) Aesthetics and psychobiology, New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
3.
BertaminiM.JonesL. A.SpoonerA.HechtH. (2005) Boundary extension: The role of magnification, object size, context, and binocular information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance31: 1288–1307. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.31.6.1288.
4.
BrownT. A.MungerM. P. (2010) Representational momentum, spatial layout, and viewpoint dependency. Visual Cognition18: 780–800. doi:10.1080/1350628090 3336535.
5.
ClottesJ.Lewis-WilliamsD. (1998) The shamans of prehistory: Trance and magic in the painted caves, New York, NY: Harry N. Abrams.
6.
CourtneyJ. R. (2006) Examining memory for area and distance: Untangling the relationship between memory psychophysics and boundary extension, (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Texas Christian University: Fort Worth, TX.
7.
DanielsK. K.IntraubI. (2006) The shape of a view: Are rectilinear views necessary to elicit boundary extension?. Visual Cognition14: 129–149. doi:10.1080/13506280500460563.
8.
DeaconT. W. (1997) The symbolic species: The co-evolution of language and the brain, New York, NY: Norton.
9.
DeLuciaP. R.MaldiaM. M. (2006) Visual memory for moving scenes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology59: 340–360. doi:10.1080/17470210500151444.
10.
DickinsonC. A.IntraubH. (2008) Transsaccadic representation of layout: What is the time course of boundary extension?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance34: 543–555. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.3.543.
11.
DobrezL. (2013) The perception of depicted motion. Arts2: 383–446. doi:10.3390/arts2020383.
12.
DobrezP. (2013) The case of hand stencils and prints as proprio-performative. Arts2: 273–327. doi:10.3390/arts2040273.
13.
FinkeR. A.FreydJ. J. (1985) Transformations of visual memory induced by implied motions of pattern elements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition11: 780–794. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.11.1-4.780.
14.
FinkeR. A.ShyiG. C. W. (1988) Mental extrapolation and representational momentum for complex implied motions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition14: 112–120. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.14.1.112.
15.
FinkeR. A.FreydJ. J.ShyiG. C. W. (1986) Implied velocity and acceleration induce transformations of visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General115: 175–188. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.115.2.175.
16.
FreydJ. J. (1983) The mental representation of movement when static stimuli are viewed. Perception & Psychophysics33: 575–581. doi:10.3758/BF03202940.
17.
FreydJ. J. (1993) Five hunches about perceptual processes and dynamic representations. In: MeyerD.KornblumS. (eds) Attention and performance XIV: Synergies in experimental psychology, artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 99–119.
18.
FreydJ. J.FinkeR. A. (1984) Representational momentum. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition10: 126–132. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.10.1.126.
19.
FutterweitL. R.BeilinH. (1994) Recognition memory for movement in photographs: A developmental study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology57: 163–179. doi:10.1006/jecp.1994.1008.
20.
GagnierK. M.IntraubI. (2012) When less is more: Line drawings lead to greater boundary extension than do colour photographs. Visual Cognition20: 815–824. doi:10.1080/13506285.2012.703705.
21.
GottesmanC. V.IntraubH. (2002) Surface construal and the mental representation of scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance28: 589–599. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.28.3.589.
22.
GottesmanC. V.IntraubH. (2003) Constraints on spatial extrapolation in the mental representation of scenes: View-boundaries vs. object-boundaries. Visual Cognition10: 875–893. doi:10.1080/13506280344000130.
23.
HayesA. E.FreydJ. J. (2002) Representational momentum when attention is divided. Visual Cognition9: 8–27. doi:10.1080/13506280143000296.
24.
HubbardT. L. (1990) Cognitive representation of linear motion: Possible direction and gravity effects in judged displacement. Memory & Cognition18: 299–309. doi:10.3758/BF03213883.
25.
HubbardT. L. (1996) Displacement in depth: Representational momentum and boundary extension. Psychological Research59: 33–47. doi:10.1007/BF00419832.
26.
HubbardT. L. (2005) Representational momentum and related displacements in spatial memory: A review of the findings. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review12: 822–851.
27.
HubbardT. L. (2014) Forms of momentum across space: Representational, operational, and attentional. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review21: 1371–1403. doi:10.3758/BF03196775.
28.
HubbardT. L.CourtneyJ. R. (2006) Evidence suggestive of separate visual dynamics in perception and in memory. In: AlbertazziL. (ed.) Visual thought: The depictive space of perception, Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Benjamins Publishing, pp. 71–98.
HubbardT. L.HutchisonJ. L.CourtneyJ. R. (2010) Boundary extension: Findings and theories. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology63: 1467–1494. doi:10.1080/17470210903511236.
31.
HubbardT. L.KumarA. M.CarpC. L. (2009) Effects of spatial cueing on representational momentum. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition35: 666–677. doi:10.1037/a0014870.
32.
HumphreyN. (1998) Cave art, autism, and the evolution of the human mind. Cambridge Archaeological Journal8: 165–191. doi:10.1017/S0959774300001827.
33.
HuronD. L. (2006) Sweet anticipation: Music and the psychology of expectation, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
34.
IntraubH. (2010) Rethinking scene perception: A multisource model. Psychology of Learning and Motivation52: 231–264. doi:10.1016/S0079-7421(10)52006-1.
35.
IntraubH.DickinsonC. A. (2008) False memory 1/20th of a second later: What the early onset of boundary extension reveals about perception. Psychological Science19: 1007–1014. doi:10.1111/j. 1107 1467-9280.2008.02192.x.
36.
IntraubH.RichardsonM. (1989) Wide-angle memories of close-up scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition15: 179–187. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.15.2.179.
37.
IntraubH.BenderR. S.MangelsJ. A. (1992) Looking at pictures but remembering scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition18: 180–191. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.18.1.180.
38.
IntraubH.GottesmanC. V.BillsA. J. (1998) Effects of perceiving and imaging scenes on memory for pictures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition24: 186–201. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.24.1.186.
39.
IntraubH.DanielsK. K.HorowitzT. S.WolfeJ. M. (2008) Looking at scenes while searching for numbers: Dividing attention multiplies space. Perception & Psychophysics70: 1337–1349. doi:1103 10.3758/PP.70.7.1337.
40.
IntraubH.HoffmanJ. E.WetherholdJ.StoehsS. (2006) More than meets the eye: The effect of planned fixations on scene representation. Perception & Psychophysics68: 759–769. doi:10.3758/BF03193699.
41.
JarrayaM.AmorimM. A.BardyB. G. (2005) Optical flow and viewpoint change modulate the perception and memorization of complex motion. Perception & Psychophysics67: 951–961. doi:10.3758/BF03193622.
42.
KourtziZ.KanwisherN. (2000) Activation in human MT/MST for static images with implied motion. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience12: 48–55. doi:10.1162/08989290051137594.
43.
Lewis-WilliamsD. (2002) The mind in the cave: Consciousness and the origins of art, London, England: Thames and Hudson.
44.
Lewis-WilliamsD.PearceD. (2005) Inside the neolithic mind, London, England: Thames and Hudson.
45.
MeyerL. B. (1956) Emotion and meaning in music, Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
46.
MithenS. J. (1996) The prehistory of the mind, London, England: Thames and Hudson.
47.
MungerM. P.MulthaupK. S. (2016) No imagination effect on boundary extension. Memory & Cognition44: 73–88. doi:10.3758/s13421-015-0541-3.
48.
MungerM. P.OwensT. R.ConwayJ. E. (2005) Are boundary extension and representational momentum related?. Visual Cognition12: 1041–1056. doi:10.1080/13506280444000643.
49.
MungerM. P.SolbergJ. L.HorrocksK. K.PrestonA. S. (1999) Representational momentum for rotations in depth: Effects of shading and axis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition25: 157–171. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.25.1.157.
50.
MungerM. P.DellingerM. C.LloydT. G.Johnson-ReidK.TonelliN. J.WolfK.ScottJ. M. (2006) Representational momentum in scenes: Learning spatial layout. Memory & Cognition34: 1557–1568. doi:10.3758/BF03195919.
51.
NagaiM.KazaiK.YagiA. (2002) Larger forward displacement in the direction of gravity. Visual Cognition9: 28–40. doi:10.1080/13506280143000304.
52.
SeniorC.WardJ.DavidA. S. (2002) Representational momentum and the brain: An investigation of the functional necessity of V5/MT. Visual Cognition9: 81–92. doi:10.1080/13506280143000331.
53.
SeniorC.BarnesJ.GiampietrocV.SimmonsA.BullmoreE. T.BrammerM.DavidA. S. (2000) The functional neuroanatomy of implicit-motion perception or representational momentum. Current Biology10: 16–22. doi:10.1016/S0960-9822(99)00259-6.
54.
ThorntonI. M.HayesA. E. (2004) Anticipating action in complex scenes. Visual Cognition11: 341–370. doi:10.1080/13506280344000374.
55.
WilsonM.LancasterJ.EmmoreyK. (2010) Representational momentum for the human body: Awkwardness matters, experience does not. Cognition116: 242–250. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.05.006.
