Abstract
Using a change detection paradigm, Barenholtz, Cohen, Feldman, and Singh (2003) found that changes in concave regions of a contour are more easily detected than changes in convex regions. In a series of three experiments, we investigated this concavity effect using the same paradigm. We observed the effect in wirelike stimuli as well as in silhouettes (Experiment 1) and in complex, smoothed images as opposed to angular polygons (Experiment 2). We also observed a systematic effect of the magnitude of the change (Experiment 1). Furthermore, we find that the effect cannot be attributed to either local or global processing effects, but rather to a combination of both “mere” concaveness and an effect due to changes in the perceived part structure of the stimulus object (Experiment 3). For our data analysis, we used a nonparametric bootstrap method, which greatly increases sensitivity (compared to more traditional analyses like ANOVA).
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Alhazen, I. (1989). Book of optics. In A. I. Sabra (Ed. & Trans.),The Optics of Ibn al-Haytham (Vol. 1). London: Warburg Institute. (Original work published ca. 1030)
Attneave, F. (1954). Some informational aspects of visual perception.Psychological Review,61, 183–193.
Barenholtz, E., Cohen, E., Feldman, J., &Singh, M. (2003). Detection of change in shape: An advantage for concavities.Cognition,89, 1–9.
Barenholtz, E., &Feldman, J. (2003). Visual comparisons within and between object-parts: Evidence for a single-part superiority effect.Vision Research,43, 1655–1666.
Bertamini, M., &Farrant, T. (2005). Detection of change in shape and its relation to part structure.Acta Psychologica,120, 35–54.
Bertamini, M., &Farrant, T. (2006). The perceived structural shape of thin (wire-like) objects is different from that of silhouettes.Perception,35, 1679–1692.
Bertamini, M., &Lawson, R. (2006). Visual search for a circular region perceived as a figure versus as a hole: Evidence of the importance of part structure.Perception & Psychophysics,58, 776–791.
Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding.Psychological Review,94, 115–147.
Brainard, D. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox.Spatial Vision,10, 433–436.
Chernick, M. (1999).Bootstrap methods: A practitioner’s guide. New York: Wiley.
Cohen, E., Barenholtz, E., Singh, M., &Feldman, J. (2005). What change detection tells us about the visual representation of shape.Journal of Vision,5, 313–321.
Cohen, J. (1988).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Davison, A., &Hinkley, D. (1997).Bootstrap methods and their application. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
De Winter, J., &Wagemans, J. (2004). Contour-based object identification and segmentation: Stimuli, norms and data, and software tools.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,36, 604–624.
De Winter, J., &Wagemans, J. (2006). Segmentation of object outlines into parts: A large-scale, integrative study.Cognition,99, 275–325.
De Winter, J., & Wagemans, J. (in press—a). The awakening of Attneave’s sleeping cat: Identification of everyday objects on the basis of straight-line versions of outlines.Perception.
De Winter, J., & Wagemans, J. (in press—b). Perceptual salience of points along the contour of everyday objects: A large-scale study.Perception & Psychophysics.
Efron, B. (1979). Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife.Annals of Statistics,7, 1–26.
Efron, B., &Tibshirani, R. (1993).An introduction to the bootstrap. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Feldman, J., &Singh, M. (2005). Information along contours and object boundaries.Psychological Review,112, 243–252.
Hanoulle, I., Waeytens, K., Wagemans, J., ďYdewalle, G., & Van Rensbergen, J. (1993, August).Representation and segmentation of shape based on curvature singularities. Poster presented at the 16th European Conference on Visual Perception (ECVP), Edinburgh.
Hoffman, D., &Richards, W. (1984). Parts of recognition.Cognition,18, 65–96.
Hoffman, D., &Singh, M. (1997). Salience of visual parts.Cognition,63, 29–78.
Keane, S., Hayward, W., &Burke, D. (2003). Detection of three types of changes to novel objects.Visual Cognition,10, 101–129.
Kirk, R.E. (1995).Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral Sciences. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Koenderink, J. (1984). What does the occluding contour tell us about solid shape?Perception,13, 321–330.
Kristjánsson, A., &Tse, P. (2001). Curvature discontinuities are cues for rapid shape analysis.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 390–403.
Lee, T. (2003). Computations in the early visual cortex.Journal of Physiology,97, 121–139.
Marr, D. (1982).Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Mooney, C., &Duval, R. (1993).Bootstrapping: A nonparametric approach to statistical inference. London: Sage.
Pelli, D. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies.Spatial Vision,10, 437–442.
Resnikoff, H. (1985).The illusion of reality: Topics in information science. New York: Springer.
Singh, M., &Hoffman, D. (2001). Part-based representations of visual shape and implications for visual cognition. In T. Shipley & P. Kellman (Eds.),From fragments to objects: Grouping and segmentation in vision (Advances in Psychology, Vol. 130, pp. 401–459). New York: Elsevier.
Singh, M., Seyranian, G., &Hoffman, D. (1999). Parsing silhouettes: The short-cut rule.Perception & Psychophysics,61, 636–660.
Vandekerckhove, J., Panis, S., & Wagemans, J. (2005, September).An empirical measure of closure. Paper presented at the 36th Meeting of the European Mathematical Psychology Group, Padua.
Waeytens, K., Hanoulle, I., Wagemans, J., &d’Ydewalle, G. (1994). Human representation of closed contours. In F. Dillen, I. Van de Woestijne, & L. Verstraelen (Eds.),Geometry and topology of submanifolds VI (pp. 298–306). Singapore: World Scientific.
Wagemans, J., Hanoulle, I., Waeytens, K., &d’Ydewalle, G. (1994). Are curvature singularities sufficient to represent shape? [Abstract].Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science,35, 1918.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by a research grant from the University Research Council (OT/00/007) and from the Fund for Scientific Research (FWO-Vlaanderen G.0189.02) to J.W. The research also forms part of a larger research program funded by the University Research Council (GOA-TBA/2005/03).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vandekerckhove, J., Panis, S. & Wagemans, J. The concavity effect is a compound of local and global effects. Perception & Psychophysics 69, 1253–1260 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193960
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193960