C Lamote | PubMed Health

PubMed2000

Minimal information to determine affine shape equivalence.

Participants judged the affine equivalence of 2 simultaneously presented 4-point patterns. Performance level (d') varied between 1.5 and 2.7, depending on the information available for solving the correspondence problem (insufficient in Experiment 1a, superfluous in Experiment 1b, and minimal in Experiments 1c, 2a, 2b) and on the exposure time (unlimited in Experiments 1 and 2a and 500 ms in Experiment 2b), but it did not vary much with the complexity of the affine transformation (rotation and slant in Experiment 1 and same plus tilt in Experiment 2). Performance in Experiment 3 was lower with 3-point patterns than with 4-point patterns, whereas blocking the trials according to the affine transformation parameters had little effect. Determining affine shape equivalence with minimal-information displays is based on a fast assessment of qualitatively or quasi-invariant properties such as convexity/ concavity, parallelism, and collinearity.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

An interactive activation approach to object processing: effects of structural similarity, name frequency, and task in normality and pathology.

We present a computational model of the processes involved in retrieving stored semantic and name information from objects, using a simple interactive activation and competition architecture. We simulate evidence showing a cross-over in normal reaction times to make semantic classification and identification responses to objects from categories with either structurally similar or structurally dissimilar exemplars, and that identification times to objects from these two different classes correlate differentially with measures of the structural similarity of objects within the category and the frequency of the object's name. Structural similarity exerts a negative effect on object decision as well as naming, though this effect is larger on naming. Also, on naming, structural similarity interacts with the effects of name frequency, captured in the model by varying the weight on connections from semantic to name units; frequency effects are larger with structurally dissimilar items. In addition, (1) the range of potential errors for objects from these two classes, when responses are elicited before activation reached a stable state, differ--a wider range of errors occur to objects from categories with structurally similar exemplars; and (2) simulated lesions to different locations within the model produce selective impairments to identification but not to semantic classification responses to objects from categories with structurally similar exemplars. We discuss the results in relation to data on visual object processing in both normality and pathology.

Anomia↗