Abstract
Visual object recognition is considered to be largely translation invariant. An earlier study (Foster & Kahn, 1985), however, has indicated that recognition of complex novel stimuli is partially specific to location in the visual field: It is significantly easier to determine the identity of two briefly displayed random patterns if both stimuli are presented at the same, rather than at different, locations. In a series ofsame/different discrimination tasks, we characterize the processes underlying this “displacement effect”: Horizontal and vertical translations are equally effective in reducing performance. Making the task more difficult by increasing pattern similarity leads to even higher positional specificity. The displacement effect disappears after rotation or contrast reversal of the patterns, indicating that positional specificity depends on relatively low levels of processing. Control experiments rule out explanations that are independent of visual pattern memory, such as spatial attention, eye movements, or retinal afterimages. Positional specificity of recognition is found only forsame trials. Our results demonstrate that position invariance, a widely acknowledged property of the human visual system, is limited to specific experimental conditions. Normalization models involving mental shifts of an early visual representation or of a window of attention cannot easily account for these findings.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, C. H., &Van Essen, D. C. (1987). Shifter circuits: A computational strategy for dynamic aspects of visual processing.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,84, 6297–6301.
Arnoult, M. D. (1954). Shape discrimination as a function of the angular orientation of the stimuli.Journal ofExperimental Psychology,47, 323–328.
Bach, M. (1996) The Freiburg Visual Acuity Test—Automatic measurement of visual acuity.Optometry & Vision Sciences,73, 49–53.
Bagnara, S., Simion, F., &Umiltà, C. (1984). Reference patterns and the process of normalization.Perception & Psychophysics,35, 186–192.
Biederman, I., &Cooper, E. E. (1991). Evidence for complete translational and reflectional invariance in visual object priming.Perception,20, 585–593.
Biederman, I., &Cooper, E. E. (1992). Size invariance in visual object priming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 121–133.
Bülthoff, H. H., &Edelman, S. (1992). Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,89, 60–64.
Bülthoff, H. H., &Edelman, S. (1993). Evaluating object recognition theories by computer graphics psychophysics. In T. A. Poggio & D. A. Glaser (Eds.),Exploring brain functions: Models in neuroscience (pp. 139–164). New York: Wiley.
Bundesen, C., &Larsen, A. (1975). Visual transformation of size.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,1, 214–220.
Carr, T. H., Posner, M. I., Pollatsek, A., &Snyder, C. R. R. (1979). Orthography and familiarity effects in word processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,108, 389–414.
Cavanagh, P. (1978). Size and position invariance in the visual system.Perception,7, 167–177.
Cerella, J. (1990). Pigeon pattern perception: Limits on perspective invariance.Perception,19, 141–159.
Chignell, M. H., &Krueger, L. E. (1984). Further evidence for prim-ing in perceptual matching: Temporal, not spatial, separation enhances the fast-same effect.Perception & Psychophysics,36, 257–265.
Collett, T. S. (1992). Landmark learning and guidance in insects.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B,337, 295–303.
Corballis, M. C (1988). Recognition of disoriented shapes.Psychological Review,95, 115–123.
Cronly-Dillon, J. R., Sutherland, N. S., &Wolfe, J. (1966). Intraretinal transfer of a learned visual shape discrimination in goldfish after section and regeneration of the optic nerve brachia.Experimental Neurology,15, 455–462.
Desimone, R., &Schein, S. J. (1987). Visual properties of neurons in area V4 of the macaque: Sensitivity to stimulus form.Journal of Neurophysiology,57, 835–868.
Dill, M., &Fahle, M. (1997). The role of visual field position in pattern-discrimination learning.Proceedings of the Royal Society ofLondon: Series B,264, 1031–1036.
Dill, M., &Heisenberg, M. (1995). Visual pattern memory without shape recognition.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B,349, 143–152.
Dill, M., Wolf, R., &Heisenberg, M. (1993). Visual pattern recognition in Drosophila involves retinotopic matching.Nature,365, 751–753.
Edelman, S. (1995). Class similarity and viewpoint invariance in the recognition of 3D objects.Biological Cybernetics,72, 207–220.
Edelman, S., &Bülthoff, H. H. (1992). Orientation dependence in the recognition of familiar and novel views of three-dimensional objects.Vision Research,32, 2385–2400.
Ellis, R., Allport, D. A., Humphreys, G. W., &Collis, J. (1989). Varieties of object constancy.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,41A, 775–796.
Fahle, M. (1994). Human pattern recognition: Parallel processing and perceptual learning.Perception,23, 411–427.
Fahle, M., &Edelman, S. (1993). Long-term learning in vernier acuity: Effects of stimulus orientation, range and of feedback.Vision Research,33, 397–412.
Fahle, M., Edelman, S., &Poggio, T. (1995). Fast perceptual learn-ing in hyperacuity.Vision Research,35, 3003–3013.
Farell, B. (1985). “Same “different” judgments: A review of current controversies in perceptual comparisons.Psychological Bulletin,98, 419–456.
Fiorentini, A., &Berardi, N. (1981). Learning of grating waveform discrimination: Specificity for orientation and spatial frequency.Vision Research,21, 1149–1158.
Fiser, J., &Biederman, I. (1995). Size invariance in visual object priming of gray-scale images.Perception,24, 741–748.
Földiak, P. (1991). Learning invariance from transformation sequences.Neural Computation,3, 194–200.
Foster, D. H. (1978). Visual comparison of random-dot patterns: Evidence concerning a fixed visual association between features and feature relations.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,30, 637–654.
Foster, D. H. (1984). Local and global computational factors in visual pattern recognition. In P. C. Dodwell & T. Caelli (Eds.),Figurai synthesis (pp. 83–115). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Foster, D. H. (1991). Operating on spatial relations. In R. J. Watt (Ed.),Pattern recognition by man and machinery. 50–68). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Foster, D. H., &Kahn, J. I. (1985). Internal representations and operations in the visual comparison of transformed patterns: Effects of pattern point-inversion, positional symmetry, and separation.Biological Cybernetics,51, 305–312.
Fujita, I., Tanaka, K., Ito, M., &Cheng, K. (1992). Columns for visual features in monkey inferotemporal cortex.Nature,360, 343–346.
Fukushima, K. (1980). Neocognitron: A self-organizing neural network model for a mechanism of pattern recognition unaffected by shift in position.Biological Cybernetics,36, 193–202.
Gilbert, C. D. (1994). Early perceptual learning.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,91, 1195–1197.
Heisenberg, M. (1995). Pattern recognition in insects.Current Opinion in Neurobiology,5, 475–481.
Hubel, D. H., &Wiesel, T. N. (1962). Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex.Journal of Physiology,160, 106–154.
Irwin, D. E. (1991). Information integration across saccadic eye movements.Cognitive Psychology,23, 420–456.
Irwin, J. R., &Francis, M. A. (1995). Perception of simple and complex visual stimuli: Decision strategies and hemispheric differences in same-different judgments.Perception,24, 787–809.
Ito, M., Tamura, H., Fujita, I., &Tanaka, K. (1995). Size and position invariance of neuronal responses in monkey inferotemporal cortex.Journal of Neurophysiology,73, 218–226.
Jolicoeur, P. (1985). The time to name disoriented natural objects.Memory & Cognition,13, 289–303.
Jüttner, M., &Rentschler, I. (1996). Reduced perceptual dimensionality in extrafoveal vision.Vision Research,36, 1007–1022.
Kahn, J. I., &Foster, D. H. (1981). Visual comparison of rotated and reflected random-dot patterns as a function of their positional symmetry and separation in the field.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,33A, 155–166.
Kahn, J. I., &Foster, D. H. (1986). Horizontal-vertical structure in the visual comparison of rigidly transformed patterns.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,12, 422–433.
Karni, A., &Sagi, D. (1991). Where practice makes perfect in texture discrimination: Evidence for primary visual cortex plasticity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,88, 4966–4970.
Kobatake, E., &Tanaka, K. (1994). Neuronal selectivity to complex object features in the ventral visual pathway of the macaque cerebral cortex.Journal of Neurophysiology,71, 856–867.
Kolers, P. A., Duchnicky, R. L., &Sundstroem, G. (1985). Size in the visual processing of faces and words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,11, 726–751.
Koriat, A., Norman, J., &Kimchi, R. (1991). Recognition of rotated letters: Extracting invariance across successive and simultaneous stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 444–457.
Krueger, L. E. (1978). A theory of perceptual matching.Psychological Review,85, 278–304.
Krueger, L. E. (1985). Effects of intermixed foveal and parafoveal presentation on same-different judgments: Evidence for a criterioninertia model.Perception & Psychophysics,37, 266–271.
Krueger, L. E. (1986). Positive effect of heterogeneity of difference on the same-different disparity in letter matching.Perception & Psychophysics,39, 117–122.
Krueger, L. E., &Allen, P. A. (1987). Same-different judgments of foveal and parafoveal letter pairs by older adults.Perception & Psychophysics,41, 329–334.
Kwak, H.-W., Dagenbach, D., &Egeth, H. (1991). Further evidence for a time-independent shift of the focus of attention.Perception & Psychophysics,49, 473–480.
Logothetis, N. K., Pauls, J., Bülthoff, H. H., &Poggio, T. (1994). View-dependent object recognition by monkeys.Current Biology,4, 401–414.
Logothetis, N. K., Pauls, J., &Poggio, T. (1995). Shape representation in the inferior temporal cortex of monkeys.Current Biology,5, 552–563.
Macmillan, N. A., &Creelman, C. D. (1991).Detection theory: A user’s guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Miller, J. (1996). The sampling distribution of d’.Perception & Psychophysics,58, 65–72.
Myers, R. E. (1955). Interocular transfer of pattern discrimination in cats following section of crossed optic fibers.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,48, 470–473.
Nazir, T. A., &O’Regan, J. K. (1990). Some results on translation invariance in the human visual system.Spatial Vision,5, 81–100.
Olshausen, B. A., Anderson, C. H., &Van Essen, D. C. (1993). A neurobiological model of visual attention and invariant pattern recognition based on dynamic routing of information.Journal of Neuroscience,13, 4700–4719.
O’Regan, J. K. (1992). Solving the “real” mysteries of visual perception: The world as an outside memory.Canadian Journal of Psychology,46, 461–488.
Phillips, W. A. (1974). On the distinction between sensory storage and short-term visual memory.Perception & Psychophysics,16, 283–290.
Poggio, T., Fahle, M., &Edelman, S. (1992). Fast perceptual learning in visual hyperacuity.Science,256, 1018–1021.
Proctor, R. W. (1983). A unified theory for matching-task phenomena.Psychological Review,88, 291–326.
Ramachandran, V. S. (1976). Learning-like phenomena in stereopsis.Nature,262, 382–384.
Rentschler, I., JÜttner, M., &Caelli, T. (1994). Probabilistic analysis of human supervised learning and classification.Vision Research,34, 669–687.
Rock, I. (1973).Orientation and form. New York: Academic Press.
Rolls, E. T. (1992). Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying face processing within and beyond the temporal cortical visual areas.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society ofLondon: Series B,335, 11–21.
Sagi, D., &Tanne, D. (1994). Perceptual learning: Learning to see.Current Opinion in Neurobiology,4, 195–199.
Saslow, M. G. (1967). Latency for saccadic eye movement.Journal of the Optical Society of America,57, 1030–1036.
Schwartz, E. L., Desimone, R., Albright, T. D., &Gross, C. G. (1983). Shape recognition and inferior temporal neurons.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,80, 5776–5778.
Schweitzer, L. R. (1991). Binary-choice decision time depends upon cerebral hemisphere and nature of task.Perceptual & Motor Skills,73, 147–161.
Shepard, R. N., &Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects.Science,171, 701–703.
Shiu, L.-P., &Pashler, H. (1992). Improvement in line orientation discrimination is retinally local but dependent on cognitive set.Perception & Psychophysics,52, 582–588.
Strasburger, H., Harvey, L. O., Jr., &Rentschler, I. (1991). Contrast thresholds for identification of numeric characters in direct and eccentric view.Perception & Psychophysics,49, 495–508.
Strasburger, H., Rentschler, I., &Harvey, L. O. (1994). Cortical magnification theory fails to predict visual recognition.European Journal of Neuroscience,6, 1583–1588.
Tanaka, K., Saito, H.-A., Fukada, Y., &Moriya, M. (1991). Coding visual images of objects in the inferotemporal cortex of the macaque monkey.Journal of Neurophysiology,66, 170–189.
Thompson, P. (1980). Margaret Thatcher: A new illusion.Perception,9, 483–484.
Tovee, M. J., Rolls, E. T., &Azzopardi, P. (1994). Translation invariance in the responses to faces of single neurons in the temporal visual cortical areas of the alert macaque.Journal of Neurophysiology,72, 1049–1060.
Troje, N., &Bülthoff, H. H. (1996). Face recognition under varying pose: The role of texture and shape.Vision Research,36, 1761–1771.
Virsu, V., &Rovamo, J. (1979). Visual resolution, contrast sensitivity, and the cortical magnification factor.Experimental Brain Research,37, 475–494.
Wachsmuth, E., Oram, M. W., &Perrett, D. I. (1994). Recognition of objects and their component parts: Responses of single units in the temporal cortex of the macaque.Cerebral Cortex,5, 509–522.
Wehner, R. (1981). Spatial vision in arthropods. In H. Autrum (Ed.),Handbook of sensory physiology: Vol. 7 (Part 6, Section C, pp. 287–616). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
M.D. was supported by Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds; M.F. was supported by the von Humboldt Society (Max Planck Prize) and by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 307).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dill, M., Fahle, M. Limited translation invariance of human visual pattern recognition. Perception & Psychophysics 60, 65–81 (1998). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211918
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211918