We investigated preferred or canonical views for familiar and three-dimensional nonsense objects using computer-graphics psychophysics. We assessed the canonical views for objects by allowing participants to actively rotate realistically shaded three-dimensional models in realtime. Objects were viewed on a Silicon Graphics workstation and manipulated in virtual space with a three-degree-of-freedom input device. In the first experiment, participants adjusted each object to the viewpoint from which they would take a photograph if they planned to use the object to illustrate a brochure. In the second experiment, participants mentally imaged each object on the basis of the name and then adjusted the object to the viewpoint from which they imagined it. In both experiments, there was a large degree of consistency across participants in terms of the preferred view for a given object. Our results provide new insights on the geometrical, experiential, and functional attributes that determine canonical views under ecological conditions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BatscheletE, 1981Circular Statistics in Biology (London: Academic Press)
2.
BiedermanI, 1987“Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding”Psychological Review94115–147
3.
BiedermanIGerhardsteinP C, 1993“Recognizing depth-rotated objects: Evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance191162–1182
4.
BricoloEPoggioTLogothetisN K, 1997“3D object recognition: A model of view-tuned neurons”, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 9 Eds MozerM CJordanM IPetscheT (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press) pp 41–47
5.
BülthoffH HEdelmanS, 1992“Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA8960–64
6.
BülthoffH HEdelmanSTarrM J, 1995“How are three-dimensional objects represented in the brain?”Cerebral Cortex5247–260
7.
CutzuFEdelmanS, 1994“Canonical views in object representation and recognition”Vision Research343037–3056
8.
EdelmanSBulthoffH H, 1992“Orientation dependence in the recognition of familiar and novel views of three-dimensional objects”Vision Research322385–2400
9.
FarahM JWilsonK DDrainH MTanakaJ R, 1995“The inverted face inversion effect in prosopagnosia: Evidence for mandatory, face-specific perceptual mechanisms”Vision Research352089–2093
10.
HarriesM HPerrettD ILavenderA, 1991“Preferential inspection of views of 3-D model heads”Perception20669–680
11.
HintonG EParsonsL M, 1988“Scene-based and viewer-centered representations for comparing shapes”Cognition301–35
12.
KoenderinkJ Jvan DoornA J, 1982“The shape of smooth objects and the way contours end”Perception11129–137
13.
KoenderinkJ J, 1990Solid Shape (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press)
14.
KoenderinkJ J, 1987“An internal representation for solid shape based on the topological properties of the apparent contour”, in Image Understanding: 1985 – 86 Eds RichardsWUllmanS (Norwood, NJ: Ablex) pp 257–285
15.
LogothetisN KPaulsJ, 1995“Psychophysical and physiological evidence for viewer-centered object representation in the primate”Cerebral Cortex3270–288
16.
LogothetisN KPaulsJPoggioT, 1995“Shape representation in the inferior temporal cortex of monkeys”Current Biology5552–563
17.
NiemannTLappeMHoffmannK P, 1996“Visual inspection of three-dimensional objects by human observers”Perception251027–1042
18.
PalmerSRoschEChaseP, 1981“Canonical perspective and the perception of objects”, in Attention and Performance IX Eds LongJBaddeleyA (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates) pp 135–151
19.
PerrettD IHarriesM H, 1988“Characteristic views and the visual inspection of simple faceted and smooth objects: Tetrahedra and potatoes”Perception17703–720
20.
PerrettD IHarriesM HLookerS, 1992“Use of preferential inspection to define the viewing sphere and characteristic views of an arbitrary machined tool part”Perception21497–515
21.
PerrettD IOramM WHarriesM HBevanRHietanenJ KBensonP JThomasS, 1991“Viewer-centred and object-centred coding of heads in the macaque temporal cortex”Experimental Brain Research86159–173
22.
PerrettD IOramM WHietanenJ KBensonP J, 1994“Issues of representation in object vision”, in The Neuropsychology of Higher Vision: Collated Tutorial Essays Eds FarahMRatcliffG (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates) pp 33–61
23.
PoggioTEdelmanS, 1990“A network that learns to recognize three-dimensional objects”Nature (London)343263–266
24.
PressW HTeukolskiS AVetterlingW TFlanneryB P, 1992Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
25.
SanderF, 1931“Gestaltpsychologie und Kunsttheorie: Ein Beitrag zur Psychologie der Architektur”Neue Psychologische Studien8311–333
26.
TarrM J, 1995“Rotating objects to recognize them: A case study of the role of viewpoint dependency in the recognition of three-dimensional objects”Psychonomic Bulletin and Review2(1) 55–82
27.
TarrM JPinkerS, 1989“Mental rotation and orientation-dependence in shape recognition”Cognitive Psychology21(28) 233–282
28.
TrojeNBülthoffH H, 1996“Face recognition under varying pose: The role of texture and shape”Vision Research361761–1771
29.
VerfaillieKBoutsenL, 1995“A corpus of 714 full-color images of depth-rotated objects”Perception & Psychophysics57925–961
