Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Observers can store thousands of object images in visual long-term memory with high fidelity, but the fidelity of scene representations in long-term memory is not known. Here, we probed scene-representation fidelity by varying the number of studied exemplars in different scene categories and testing memory using exemplar-level foils. Observers viewed thousands of scenes over 5.5 hr and then completed a series of forced-choice tests. Memory performance was high, even with up to 64 scenes from the same category in memory. Moreover, there was only a 2% decrease in accuracy for each doubling of the number of studied scene exemplars. Surprisingly, this degree of categorical interference was similar to the degree previously demonstrated for object memory. Thus, although scenes have often been defined as a superset of objects, our results suggest that scenes and objects may be entities at a similar level of abstraction in visual long-term memory.

Keywords

visual memory scene categories object categories memory capacity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brady

T.F.

Konkle

Alvarez

G.A.

(2009). Compression in visual short-term memory: Using statistical regularities to form more efficient memory representations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 487–502.

Brady

T.F.

Konkle

Alvarez

G.A.

Oliva

(2008). Visual long-term memory has a massive storage capacity for object details. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 105, 14325–14329.

Brady

T.F.

Konkle

Oliva

Alvarez

G.A.

(2009). Detecting changes in real-world objects: The relationship between visual long-term memory and change blindness. Communicative & Integrative Biology, 2, 1–3.

Brady

T.F.

Oliva

(2008). Statistical learning using real-world scenes: Extracting categorical regularities without conscious intent. Psychological Science, 19, 678–685.

Chun

M.M.

(2003). Scene perception and memory. In Irwin

Ross

(Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 42, pp. 79–108). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Corter

J.E.

Gluck

M.A.

(1992). Explaining basic categories: Feature predictability and information. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 291–303.

Eysenck

M.W.

(1979). Depth, elaboration, and distinctiveness. In Cermak

L.S.

Craik

F.I.M.

(Eds.), Levels of processing in human memory (pp. 89–118). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Greene

M.R.

Oliva

(2009a). The briefest of glances: The time course of natural scene understanding. Psychological Science, 20, 464–472.

Greene

M.R.

Oliva

(2009b). Recognition of natural scenes from global properties: Seeing the forest without representing the trees. Cognitive Psychology, 58, 137–176.

10.

Hollingworth

(2004). Constructing visual representations of natural scenes: The roles of short- and long-term visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 519–537.

11.

Hollingworth

(2008). Visual memory for natural scenes. In Luck

S.J.

Hollingworth

(Eds.), Visual memory (pp. 123–162). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

12.

Konkle

Brady

T.F.

Alvarez

G.A.

Oliva

(2010). Conceptual distinctiveness supports detailed visual long-term memory for real-world objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 558–578.

13.

Koutstaal

Reddy

Jackson

E.M.

Prince

Cendan

D.L.

Schacter

D.L.

(2003). False recognition of abstract versus common objects in older and younger adults: Testing the semantic categorization account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 499–510.

14.

Marr

(1982). Vision. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman.

15.

Melcher

(2006). Accumulation and persistence of memory for natural scenes. Journal of Vision, 6(1), Article 2. Retrieved August 23, 2010, from http://www.journalofvision.org/content/6/1/2

16.

Nosofsky

R.M.

(1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 39–57.

17.

Oliva

(2005). Gist of the scene. In Itti

Rees

Tsotsos

J.K.

(Eds.), The encyclopedia of neurobiology of attention (pp. 251–256). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.

18.

Oliva

Torralba

(2001). Modeling the shape of the scene: A holistic representation of the spatial envelope. International Journal of Computer Vision, 42, 145–175.

19.

Potter

M.C.

(1976). Short-term conceptual memory for pictures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 2, 509–522.

20.

Rosch

(1978). Principles of categorization. In Rosch

Lloyd

B.L.

(Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 189–206). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

21.

Schyns

P.G.

Goldstone

R.L.

Thibaut

J.P.

(1998). The development of features in object concepts. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 21, 1–17.

22.

Shepard

R.N.

(1967). Recognition memory for words, sentences, and pictures. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6, 156–163.

23.

Simons

D.J.

Levin

D.T.

(1997). Change blindness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1, 261–267.

24.

Standing

(1973). Learning 10,000 pictures. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 25, 207–222.

25.

Standing

Conezio

Haber

R.N.

(1970). Perception and memory for pictures: Single-trial learning of 2500 visual stimuli. Psychonomic Science, 19, 73–74.

26.

Thorpe

Fize

Marlot

(1996). Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature, 381, 520–522.

27.

Tversky

Hemenway

(1983). Categories of environmental scenes. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 121–149.

28.

Wiseman

Neisser

(1974). Perceptual organization as a determinant of visual recognition memory. The American Journal of Psychology, 87, 675–681.

29.

Wolfe

J.M.

(1998). Visual memory: What do you know about what you saw? Current Biology, 8, R303–R304.

30.

Vogt

Magnussen

(2007). Long-term memory for 400 pictures on a common theme. Experimental Psychology, 54, 298–303.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB

Scene Memory Is More Detailed Than You Think

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material