Cargando…

Bottom-up processing of curvilinear visual features is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization

Animate and inanimate objects differ in their intermediate visual features. For instance, animate objects tend to be more curvilinear compared to inanimate objects (e.g., Levin, Takarae, Miner, & Keil, 2001). Recently, it has been demonstrated that these differences in the intermediate visual fe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zachariou, Valentinos, Del Giacco, Amanda C., Ungerleider, Leslie G., Yue, Xiaomin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6222807/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30458511
http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/18.12.3
_version_ 1783369293006635008
author Zachariou, Valentinos
Del Giacco, Amanda C.
Ungerleider, Leslie G.
Yue, Xiaomin
author_facet Zachariou, Valentinos
Del Giacco, Amanda C.
Ungerleider, Leslie G.
Yue, Xiaomin
author_sort Zachariou, Valentinos
collection PubMed
description Animate and inanimate objects differ in their intermediate visual features. For instance, animate objects tend to be more curvilinear compared to inanimate objects (e.g., Levin, Takarae, Miner, & Keil, 2001). Recently, it has been demonstrated that these differences in the intermediate visual features of animate and inanimate objects are sufficient for categorization: Human participants viewing synthesized images of animate and inanimate objects that differ largely in the amount of these visual features classify objects as animate/inanimate significantly above chance (Long, Stormer, & Alvarez, 2017). A remaining question, however, is whether the observed categorization is a consequence of top-down cognitive strategies (e.g., rectangular shapes are less likely to be animals) or a consequence of bottom-up processing of their intermediate visual features, per se, in the absence of top-down cognitive strategies. To address this issue, we repeated the classification experiment of Long et al. (2017) but, unlike Long et al. (2017), matched the synthesized images, on average, in the amount of image-based and perceived curvilinear and rectilinear information. Additionally, in our synthesized images, global shape information was not preserved, and the images appeared as texture patterns. These changes prevented participants from using top-down cognitive strategies to perform the task. During the experiment, participants were presented with these synthesized, texture-like animate and inanimate images and, on each trial, were required to classify them as either animate or inanimate with no feedback given. Participants were told that these synthesized images depicted abstract art patterns. We found that participants still classified the synthesized stimuli significantly above chance even though they were unaware of their classification performance. For both object categories, participants depended more on the curvilinear and less on the rectilinear, image-based information present in the stimuli for classification. Surprisingly, the stimuli most consistently classified as animate were the most dangerous animals in our sample of images. We conclude that bottom-up processing of intermediate features present in the visual input is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization and that these features may convey information associated with the affective content of the visual stimuli.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6222807
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62228072018-11-09 Bottom-up processing of curvilinear visual features is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization Zachariou, Valentinos Del Giacco, Amanda C. Ungerleider, Leslie G. Yue, Xiaomin J Vis Article Animate and inanimate objects differ in their intermediate visual features. For instance, animate objects tend to be more curvilinear compared to inanimate objects (e.g., Levin, Takarae, Miner, & Keil, 2001). Recently, it has been demonstrated that these differences in the intermediate visual features of animate and inanimate objects are sufficient for categorization: Human participants viewing synthesized images of animate and inanimate objects that differ largely in the amount of these visual features classify objects as animate/inanimate significantly above chance (Long, Stormer, & Alvarez, 2017). A remaining question, however, is whether the observed categorization is a consequence of top-down cognitive strategies (e.g., rectangular shapes are less likely to be animals) or a consequence of bottom-up processing of their intermediate visual features, per se, in the absence of top-down cognitive strategies. To address this issue, we repeated the classification experiment of Long et al. (2017) but, unlike Long et al. (2017), matched the synthesized images, on average, in the amount of image-based and perceived curvilinear and rectilinear information. Additionally, in our synthesized images, global shape information was not preserved, and the images appeared as texture patterns. These changes prevented participants from using top-down cognitive strategies to perform the task. During the experiment, participants were presented with these synthesized, texture-like animate and inanimate images and, on each trial, were required to classify them as either animate or inanimate with no feedback given. Participants were told that these synthesized images depicted abstract art patterns. We found that participants still classified the synthesized stimuli significantly above chance even though they were unaware of their classification performance. For both object categories, participants depended more on the curvilinear and less on the rectilinear, image-based information present in the stimuli for classification. Surprisingly, the stimuli most consistently classified as animate were the most dangerous animals in our sample of images. We conclude that bottom-up processing of intermediate features present in the visual input is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization and that these features may convey information associated with the affective content of the visual stimuli. The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 2018-11-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6222807/ /pubmed/30458511 http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/18.12.3 Text en Copyright 2018 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
spellingShingle Article
Zachariou, Valentinos
Del Giacco, Amanda C.
Ungerleider, Leslie G.
Yue, Xiaomin
Bottom-up processing of curvilinear visual features is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization
title Bottom-up processing of curvilinear visual features is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization
title_full Bottom-up processing of curvilinear visual features is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization
title_fullStr Bottom-up processing of curvilinear visual features is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization
title_full_unstemmed Bottom-up processing of curvilinear visual features is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization
title_short Bottom-up processing of curvilinear visual features is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization
title_sort bottom-up processing of curvilinear visual features is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6222807/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30458511
http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/18.12.3
work_keys_str_mv AT zachariouvalentinos bottomupprocessingofcurvilinearvisualfeaturesissufficientforanimateinanimateobjectcategorization
AT delgiaccoamandac bottomupprocessingofcurvilinearvisualfeaturesissufficientforanimateinanimateobjectcategorization
AT ungerleiderleslieg bottomupprocessingofcurvilinearvisualfeaturesissufficientforanimateinanimateobjectcategorization
AT yuexiaomin bottomupprocessingofcurvilinearvisualfeaturesissufficientforanimateinanimateobjectcategorization