Abstract
Many theorists have postulated that axes of elongation and/or symmetry play an important role in the recognition of objects. In this paper, evidence is presented that mitigates this claim from independent assessments of the effects of axes of elongation or symmetry on the time to name rotated line drawings of common objects. This conclusion was further supported in a stronger test in which both of these variables were orthogonally controlled, the aspect ratio of elongation was manipulated, and only objects that were completely geometrically symmetrical or asymmetrical were used. In all the experiments, objects were named for several blocks to determine the influence of these variables on effects of orientation with practice. Symmetry was found to diminish the effects of orientation after practice in naming the object set, and the effects of the most extreme orientation tested (120° from upright) were diminished when both axes defined the same orientation, relative to when they defined different orientations. Contrary to many theories, these findings relegate the axes of symmetry and elongation to relatively minor roles during object identification.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding.Psychological Review,94, 115–147.
Bülthoff, H. H., &Edelman, S. (1992). Psychophysical support fora two dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,89, 60–64.
Chambers, K. W., McBeath, M. K., Schiano, D. J., &Metz, E. G. (1999). Tops are more salient than bottoms.Perception & Psychophysics,61, 625–635.
Christie, J. (1999).Image flipper: Experiment presentation software [Computer program]. Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada. Available at or.psychology.dal.ca/∝jc/psycsoft.html.
Corballis, M. C. (1988). Recognition of disoriented shapes.Psychological Review,95, 115–123.
De Caro, S. A., &Reeves, A. (2000). Rotating objects to determine orientation, not identity: Evidence from a backward-masking/dualtask procedure.Perception & Psychophysics,62, 1356–1366.
Dickerson, J., &Humphreys, G. W. (1999). On the identification of misoriented objects: Effects of task and level of stimulus description.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,11, 145–166.
Gauthier, I., &Tarr, M. J. (1997). Orientation priming of novel shapes in the context of viewpoint-dependent recognition.Perception,26, 51–73.
Gerhardstein, P. C., & Peterson, M. A. (1995).Object symmetry and axis orientation affect recognition of misoriented objects. Poster session presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Fort Lauderdale, FL.
Gibson, B., &Peterson, M. A. (1994). Does orientation-independent recognition precede orientation-dependent recognition? Evidence from a cuing paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 299–316.
Hamm, J., &McMullen, P. A. (1998). Effects of orientation on the identification of rotated objects depend on the level of identity.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 413–426.
Humphreys, G. W., &Riddoch, M. J. (1984). Routes to object constancy: Implication from neurological impairments of object constancy.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,36A, 385–415.
Humphreys, G. W., &Riddoch, M. J. (1985). Authors’ correction to “Routes to object constancy.”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,37A, 493–495.
Jolicoeur, P. (1985). The time to name disoriented natural objects.Memory & Cognition,13, 289–303.
Jolicoeur, P. (1990). Identification of disoriented objects: A dual-systems theory.Mind & Language,5, 387–410.
Jolicoeur, P., &Humphrey, K. G. (1998). Perception of rotated twodimensional and three-dimensional objects and visual shapes. In V. Walsh & J. Kulikowski (Eds.),Perceptual constancy: Why things look as they do (pp. 69–123). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kučera, H., &Francis, W. N. (1967).Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
Ling, X., &Sanocki, T. (1995). Major axes as a moderately abstract model for object recognition.Psychological Science,6, 370–375.
Liu, T., &Cooper, L. A. (2001). The influence of task requirements on priming in object decision and matching.Memory & Cognition,29, 874–882.
Marr, D. (1982).Vision. San Francisco: Freeman.
Marr, D., &Nishihara, H. K. (1978). Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series B,200, 269–294.
McMullen, P. A., &Farah, M. J. (1991). Viewer-centered and objectcentered representations in the recognition of naturalistic line drawings.Psychological Science,2, 275–277.
McMullen, P. A., Hamm, J., &Jolicoeur, P. (1995). Rotated object identification with and without orientation cues.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,49, 133–149.
McMullen, P. A., &Jolicoeur, P. (1990). The spatial frame of reference in object naming and discrimination of left-right reflections.Memory & Cognition,18, 99–115.
McMullen, P. A., &Jolicoeur, P. (1992). The reference frame and effects of orientation on finding the tops of rotated objects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 806–820.
Murray, J. E. (1995). The role of attention in the shift from orientationdependent to orientation-invariant identification of disoriented objects.Memory & Cognition,23, 49–58.
Murray, J. E. (1997). Flipping and spinning: Spatial transformation procedures in the identification of rotated natural objects.Memory & Cognition,25, 96–105.
Murray, J. E., Jolicoeur, P., McMullen, P. A., &Ingleton, M. (1993). Orientation-invariant transfer of training in the identification of rotated natural objects.Memory & Cognition,21, 604–610.
Palmer, S. E. (1990). Modern theories of Gestalt perception.Mind & Language,5, 289–323.
Pinker, S. (1984). Visual cognition: An introduction.Cognition,18, 1–63.
Quinlan, P. T., &Humphreys, G. W. (1993). Perceptual frames of reference and two-dimensional shape recognition: Further examination of internal axes.Perception,22, 1343–1364.
Riddoch, M. J., &Humphreys, G. W. (1986). Neurological impairments of object constancy: The effects of orientation and size disparities.Cognitive Neuropsychology,3, 207–224.
Robertson, L. C., Palmer, S. E., &Gomez, L. M. (1987). Reference frames in mental rotation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,13, 368–379.
Rothwell, C. A. (1995). Object recognition through invariant indexing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sekuler, A. B. (1996). Axis of elongation can determine reference frames for object perception.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,50, 270–278.
Sekuler, A. B., &Swimmer, M. B. (2000). Interactions between symmetry and elongation in determining reference frames for object perception.Canadian Journal of Psychology,54, 42–55.
Snodgrass, J. G., &Vanderwart, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,6, 174–215.
Tarr, M. J., &Pinker, S. (1989). Mental rotation and orientationdependence in shape recognition.Cognitive Psychology,5, 233–282.
Tarr, M. J., &Pinker, S. (1990). When does human object recognition use a viewer-centered reference frame?Psychological Science,1, 253–256.
Ullman, S. (1989). Aligning pictorial descriptions: An approach to object recognition.Cognition,32, 193–254.
Van Selst, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier elimination.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,47A, 631–650.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This work was supported by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and Human Frontiers Science Program awards to the second author.
Electronic supplementary material
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Large, ME., Mcmullen, P.A. & Hamm, J.P. The role of axes of elongation and symmetry in rotated object naming. Perception & Psychophysics 65, 1–19 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194779
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194779