Role of learning in three-dimensional form perception

ONE of the most remarkable characteristics of the human visual system is its ability to perceive specific three-dimensional forms in single two-dimensional contour images. This has often been attributed to a few general purpose and possibly innately specified shape biases1–6, such as those favouring symmetry and other structural regularities (Fig. 1). An alternative approach proposed by the early empiricists7–10 and since tested11 suggests that this ability may also be acquired from visual experience, with the three-dimensional percept being the manifestation of a learned association between specific two-dimensional projections and the correlated three-dimensional structures. These studies of shape learning have been considered inconclusive, however, because their results can potentially be accounted for as cognitive decisions that might have little to do with shape perception per se. Here we present an experimental system that enables objective verification of the role of learning in shape perception by rendering the learning to be perceptually manifest. We show that the human visual system can learn associations between arbitrarily paired two-dimensional pictures and (projectionally consistent) three-dimensional structures. These results implicate high-level recognition processes in the task of shape perception.

[1]  D. Marr,et al.  Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes , 1978, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[2]  David Hume A Treatise of Human Nature: Being an Attempt to introduce the experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects , 1972 .

[3]  A. Ames Visual perception and the rotating trapezoidal window , 1951 .

[4]  S. Ullman The Interpretation of Visual Motion , 1979 .

[5]  J. Hochberg,et al.  A quantitative approach to figural "goodness". , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[6]  T. Poggio,et al.  A network that learns to recognize three-dimensional objects , 1990, Nature.

[7]  H. Wallach,et al.  The memory effect of visual perception of three-dimensional form. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[8]  F. Attneave,et al.  The determination of perceived tridimensional orientation by minimum criteria , 1969 .

[9]  Y. Miyashita Inferior temporal cortex: where visual perception meets memory. , 1993, Annual review of neuroscience.

[10]  Tomaso Poggio,et al.  Image Representations for Visual Learning , 1996, Science.

[11]  R. Gregory Perceptions as hypotheses. , 1980, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[12]  Michael J. Tarr,et al.  Article Commentary: Orientation-Dependent Mechanisms in Shape Recognition: Further Issues , 1991 .

[13]  H. Wallach,et al.  The kinetic depth effect. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[14]  H H Bülthoff,et al.  Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  K. Koffka Principles Of Gestalt Psychology , 1936 .

[16]  Michael J. Morgan,et al.  Molyneux's Question: Vision, Touch and the Philosophy of Perception. , 1979 .

[17]  M. Stryker Temporal associations , 1991, Nature.

[18]  Takeo Kanade,et al.  Recovery of the Three-Dimensional Shape of an Object from a Single View , 1981, Artif. Intell..

[19]  I. Rock,et al.  A case of viewer-centered object perception , 1987, Cognitive Psychology.