Abstract
In the possible/impossible object decision test, priming has consistently been found for structurally possible, but not impossible, objects, leading Schacter, Cooper, and Delaney (1990) to suggest that priming relies on a system that represents the global 3-D structure of objects. Using a modified design with matching objects to control for the influence of episodic memory, Ratcliff and McKoon (1995) and Williams and Tarr (1997) found negative priming for impossible objects (i.e.), lower performance for old than for new items). Both teams argued that priming derives from (1) episodic memory for object features and (2) bias to respond “possible” to encoded objects or their possible parts. The present study applied the matched-objects design to the original Schacter and Cooper stimuli—same possible objects and matching impossible figures—with minimal procedural variation. The data from Experiment 1 only partially supported the bias models and suggested that priming was mediated by both local and global structural descriptions. Experiment 2 showed that negative priming for impossible objects derived from the structural properties of these objects, not from the influence of episodic memory on task performance. Supplemental materials for this study may be downloaded from mc.psychonomic-journals .org/content/supplemental.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Arguin, M., & Saumier, D. (2004). Independent processing of parts and of their spatial organization in complex visual objects. Psychological Science, 15, 629–633.
Behrmann, M., Peterson, M. A., Moscovitch, M., & Suzuki, S. (2006). Independent representation of parts and the relations between them: Evidence from integrative agnosia. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 32, 1169–1184.
Bentin, S., & Golland, Y. (2002). Meaningful processing of meaningless stimuli: The influence of perceptual experience on early visual processing of faces. Cognition, 86, B1-B14.
Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94, 115–147.
Biederman, I., & Cooper, E. E. (1991). Priming contour-deleted images: Evidence for intermediate representations in visual object recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 393–419.
Bowers, J. S., & Marsolek, C. J. (Eds.) (2003). Rethinking implicit memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burgund, E. D., & Marsolek, C. J. (2000). Viewpoint-invariant and viewpoint-dependent object recognition in dissociable neural subsystems. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 480–489.
Carrasco, M., & Seamon, J. G. (1996). Priming impossible figures in the object decision test: The critical importance of perceived stimulus complexity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 344–351.
Cooper, L. A. (1990). Mental representation of three-dimensional objects in visual problem solving and recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 1097–1106.
Cooper, L. A., & Schacter, D. L. (1992). Dissociations between structural and episodic representations of visual objects. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 141–146.
Cooper, L. A., Schacter, D. L., Ballesteros, S., & Moores, C. (1992). Priming and recognition of transformed three-dimensional objects: Effects of size and reflection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 43–57.
Edelman, S., & Intrator, N. (2000). (Course coding of shape fragments) + (retinotopy) approximately = representation of structure. Spatial Vision, 13, 255–264.
Foster, D. H., & Gilson, S. J. (2002). Recognizing novel 3-D objects by summing signals from parts and views. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 269, 1939–1947.
Friedman, D., & Cycowicz, Y. M. (2006). Repetition priming of possible and impossible objects from ERP and behavioral perspectives. Psychophysiology, 43, 569–578.
Gauthier, I., & Tarr, M. J. (1997). Orientation priming of novel shapes in the context of viewpoint-dependent recognition. Perception, 26, 51–73.
Glushko, R. J., & Cooper, L. A. (1978). Spatial comprehension and comparison processes in verification tasks. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 391–421.
Goshen-Gottstein, Y., & Kempinsky, H. (2001). Probing memory with conceptual cues at multiple retention intervals: A comparison of forgetting rates on implicit and explicit tests. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 139–146.
Habeck, C., Hilton, H. J., Zarahn, E., Brown, T., & Stern, Y. (2006). An event-related fMRI study of the neural networks underlying repetition suppression and reaction time priming in implicit visual memory. Brain Research, 075, 133–141.
Hayward, W. G. (2003). After the viewpoint debate: Where next in object recognition?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 425–427.
Henson, R. N. A. (2003). Neuroimaging studies of priming. Progress in Neurobiology, 70, 53–81.
Hummel, J. E., & Biederman, I. (1992). Dynamic binding in a neural network for shape recognition. Psychological Review, 9, 480–517.
Hummel, J. E., & Stankiewicz, B. J. (1996). Categorical relations in shape perception. Spatial Vision, 10, 201–236.
Humphrey, G. K., Goodale, M. A., Jakobson, L. S., & Servos, P. (1994). The role of surface information in object recognition: Studies of a visual form agnosic and normal subjects. Perception, 23, 1457–1481.
Itier, R. J., & Taylor, M. J. (2004). Effects of repetition learning on upright, inverted and contrast-reversed face processing using ERPs. NeuroImage, 21, 1518–1532.
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: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. San Francisco: Freeman.
Marr, D., & Nishihara, H. K. (1978). Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of 3-D shapes. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 200, 269–294.
Marsolek, C. J., & Burgund, E. D. (2005). Initial storage of unfamiliar objects: Examining memory stores with signal detection analyses. Acta Psychologica, 119, 81–106.
McBride, D. M., & Dosher, B. A. (1997). A comparison of forgetting in an implicit and explicit memory task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 371–392.
Mitchell, D. B., & Brown, A. S. (1988). Persistent repetition priming in picture naming and its dissociation from recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 213–222.
Penney, T. B., Mecklinger, A., Hilton, H. J., & Cooper, L. A. (2000). Priming and recognition of novel 3-D objects: Guidance from eventrelated potentials. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 1, 69–92.
Poldrack, R. (1996). On testing for stochastic dissociations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 434–448.
Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (1995). Bias in the priming of object decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 754–767.
Schacter, D. L., & Buckner, R. L. (1998). Priming and the brain. Neuron, 20, 185–195.
Schacter, D. L., & Cooper, L. A. (1993). Implicit and explicit memory for novel visual objects: Structure and function. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 19, 995–1009.
Schacter, D. L., & Cooper, L. A. (1995). Bias in the priming of object decisions: Logic, assumption, and data. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 768–776.
Schacter, D. L., Cooper, L. A., & Delaney, S. M. (1990). Implicit memory for unfamiliar objects depends on access to structural descriptions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 5–24.
Schacter, D. L., Cooper, L. A., Delaney, S. M., Peterson, M. A., & Tharan, M. (1991). Implicit memory for possible and impossible objects: Constraints on the construction of structural descriptions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 3–19.
Schacter, D. L., Cooper, L. A., Tharan, M., & Rubens, A. B. (1991). Preserved priming of novel objects in patients with memory disorders. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 3, 117–130.
Schacter, D. L., Cooper, L. A., & Treadwell, J. (1993). Preserved priming of novel objects across size transformation in amnesic patients. Psychological Science, 4, 331–335.
Schacter, D. L., Cooper, L. A., & Valdiserri, M. (1992). Implicit and explicit memory for novel visual objects in older and younger adults. Psychology & Aging, 7, 299–308.
Schacter, D. L., Reiman, E., Uecker, A., Polster, M. R., Yun, L. S., & Cooper, L. A. (1995). Brain regions associated with retrieval of structurally coherent visual information. Nature, 376, 587–590.
Snodgrass, J. G., & Corwin, J. (1988). Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory: Applications to dementia and amnesia. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 34–50.
Soldan, A., Gazes, Y., Hilton, H. J., & Stern, Y. (2008). Aging does not affect brain patterns of repetition effects associated with perceptual priming of novel objects. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 1762–1776.
Soldan, A., Hilton, H. J., Cooper, L. A., & Stern, Y. (in press). Priming of familiar and unfamiliar visual objects over delays in young and older adults. Psychology & Aging.
Soldan, A., Mangels, J. A., & Cooper, L. A. (2006). Evaluating models of object decision priming: Evidence from event-related potential repetition effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 32, 230–248.
Soldan, A., Mangels, J. A., & Cooper, L. A. (2008). Effects of attention on perceptual priming of novel visual objects.Memory, 16, 873–895.
Stern, Y., Hilton, H. J., Liu, T., Gladstone, S., Giaime, A., & Cooper, L. A. (2000, April). The effect of study-to-test delay on implicit memory for novel objects in elderly and young volunteers. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, San Francisco.
Tulving, E., & Schacter, D. L. (1990). Priming and human memory systems. Science, 247, 301–306.
Wiggs, C. L., Weisberg, J., & Martin, A. (2006). Repetition priming across the adult life span—The long and short of it. Aging, Neuropsychology, & Cognition, 13, 308–325.
Williams, P., & Tarr, M. J. (1997). Structural processing and implicit memory for possible and impossible figures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 1344–1361.
Wixted, J. T., & Ebbesen, E. B. (1991). On the form of forgetting. Psychological Science, 2, 409–415.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Additional information
This work was supported by NIA Grant RO1-AG16714 to Y.S.
Electronic supplementary material
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Soldan, A., Hilton, H.J. & Stern, Y. Bias effects in the possible/impossible object decision test with matching objects. Memory & Cognition 37, 235–247 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.37.2.235
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.37.2.235