Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10820588

A code-theoretical note on object handedness.

E Leeuwenberg·P van der Helm
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This study is a theoretical exercise dealing with discrimination between images and mirror-images. It focuses on the way codes of shapes represent their handedness. We compare two code systems with different reference frames. These frames determine the specific sensitivity of each system. One system uses an asymmetric reference frame. It is called the H-system and was inspired by an idea of Corballis (1988 Psychological Review 95 115-123). The other system, being our proposal, uses a symmetric reference frame and we have named it the M-system. We demonstrate the following. A code of the H-system provides a cue for the handedness of a shape, but not for rotation, i.e. no cue for the appropriate kind of code rotation which should be tested in case images and mirror-images are discerned by mental rotation. The M-system is the converse in both respects. A code of this system does not provide a handedness cue but, instead, a rotation cue. Thus, for handedness discrimination, the H-system neither needs nor guides mental rotation, whereas the M-system does both. This M-system generates object-centred structural codes enriched with viewpoint information. Various visual experiments reported in the literature favour the M-system over the H-system, implying that perception does not make use of an asymmetric but of a symmetric reference frame.

Explore related subjects

Form PerceptionFunctional LateralityHumansModels, PsychologicalJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E Leeuwenberg, P van der Helm. 2000. A code-theoretical note on object handedness.. https://doi.org/10.1068/p2993

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

Visual perception: shaping what we see.

A new psychophysical study has examined the free flow of perception as observers viewed stimuli with several possible visual interpretations. The results suggest that our subjective impression of such ambiguous patterns may be more closely linked to the brain's encoding of complex shape than previously appreciated.

Form Perception↗
PubMed2003

The shape of holes.

The shape of holes can be recognized as accurately as the shape of objects (Palmer, S. E. (1999). Vision science: photons to phenomenology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), yet the area enclosed by a hole is a background region, and it can be demonstrated that background regions are not represented as having shape. What is therefore the shape of a hole, if any? To resolve this apparent paradox, we suggest that the shape of a hole is available indirectly from the shape of the surrounding object. We exploited the fact that observers are faster at judging the position of convex vertices than concave ones (Perception 30 (2001) 1295), and using a figural manipulation of figure/ground we found a reversal of the relative speeds when the same contours were presented as holes instead of objects. If contours were perceived as belonging to the hole rather than the surrounding object then there would have been no qualitative difference in responses to the object and hole stimuli. We conclude that the contour bounding a hole is automatically assigned to the surrounding object, and that a change in perception of a region from object to hole always drastically changes the encoded information. We discuss the many interesting aspects of holes as a subject of study in different disciplines and predict that much insight especially about shape will continue to come from holes.

Form Perception↗
PubMed2003

Visual comparisons within and between object parts: evidence for a single-part superiority effect.

Subjects judged whether two marks placed at different positions along a curved contour were physically the same. When targets were separated by a concave curvature extremum--corresponding to a part-boundary--decision latencies were longer than when they straddled an equally curved convex extremum, demonstrating a "single-part superiority effect". This difference increased with both stimulus duration and the magnitude of contour curvature. However, it disappeared when the global configuration was not consistent with a part-boundary interpretation, suggesting a critical role of global organization in part decomposition.

Form Perception↗