Increasing task demand by obstructing object recognition increases boundary extension

Abstract

Individuals consistently remember seeing wider-angle versions of previously viewed scenes than actually existed. The multi-source model of boundary extension (BE) suggests many sources of information contribute to this visual memory error. Color diagnosticity is known to affect object recognition with poorer recognition for atypically versus typically colored objects. Scenes with low-color diagnostic main objects and two versions of scenes with high-color diagnostic main objects (typically and atypically colored) were tested to determine if the reduced ability to identify the main object in a scene influences BE. Scenes were presented to one group of participants for 46 ms and another group for 250 ms. Each scene was followed by a mask and a request for a recognition response concerning the identity of the main object. The scene was then immediately presented again for testing and participants rated it as depicting a more close-up view, more wide-angle, or the same view as before. The study demonstrates that poorer encoding of main objects in scenes leads to increased BE, but trial-by-trial recognition accuracy had no relationship to BE magnitude. This finding provides further insight into the impact of task demand and main object recognition on BE.

Anticipatory memory for regular and random patterns.

“…They remembered seeing less of the patterns than were shown. This outcome is in contrast to numerous experiments in which briefly presented simple or complex real-world scenes elicited BE in similar WM paradigms (Dickinson & Intraub, 2008; Intraub & Dickinson, 2008; Intraub et al, 1996; Intraub et al, 2006; Hale et al, 2016), even when the briefly presented scenes were inverted or rotated 90° (Beighley & Intraub, 2016).…”

“…Real-world scenes elicited BE given only a brief presentation (e.g., a 250 ms presentation, allowing only a single eye fixation) and a brief, masked retention interval of 42 ms to 2 s (Dickinson & Intraub, 2008; Intraub & Dickinson, 2008; Intraub, Gottesman, Willey, & Zuk, 1996; Intraub et al, 2006). Rapid BE occurred even when the scenes were presented in unusual orientations (upside down or sideways; Beighley & Intraub, 2016) or when they contained objects in nondiagnostic colors (e.g., a blue banana; Hale et al, 2016). If our novel patterns are as evocative of surrounding space as are real-world scenes, BE should also occur in the WM paradigm.…”

“…Views of single-object scenes and multiobject scenes shown for relatively long durations (e.g., 15 s) elicit BE in long-term memory (LTM) paradigms (e.g., Gagnier & Intraub, 2012; Munger & Multhaup, 2016). BE also occurs for single- and multiobject views when photographs are briefly presented (1 s or less) in working memory (WM) paradigms with brief retention intervals of 2 s or less (e.g., Beighley & Intraub, 2016; Dickinson & Intraub, 2008; Hale, Brown, & McDunn, 2016; Intraub & Dickinson, 2008). In the current research, we sought to determine if patterns of objects, lacking the semantic content and spatial layout typical of real-world scenes, can elicit BE in both LTM and WM paradigms, and if pattern regularity (in contrast to random patterns) might enhance anticipatory representation due to pattern predictability.…”

“…Finally, we thought it was important to test our hypotheses using two common paradigms that have repeatedly yielded BE for photographs of real-world scenes: first, the LTM paradigm used by McDunn et al (2014) and Mamus and Boduroglu (2018), which is a commonly used paradigm in BE research (see Hubbard, Hutchison, & Courtney, 2010, for a review); second, the WM paradigm, in which real-world scenes were briefly presented and boundary memory tested moments later (e.g., Beighley & Intraub, 2016; Hale et al, 2016; Dickinson & Intraub, 2008; Intraub & Dickinson, 2008; Intraub, Hoffman, Wetherhold, & Stoehs, 2006). Should nonscene patterns elicit BE in the LTM paradigm, we wanted to determine if these patterns, like real-world scenes would elicit BE under the time demands of the WM paradigm or if the relatively limited informational content of visual patterns, in comparison to real-world scenes, might not provide a sufficient foundation for anticipatory representation.…”

Predictive processing of scene layout depends on naturalistic depth of field

“…Experiment 2 measured BE by asking participants whether a second image looks closer or farther than a previously observed image. In line with previous work, our findings show that participants tend to perceive the second image as closer, even though the two images are identical (Bainbridge and Baker, 2020;Park et al, 2021;Intraub and Dickinson, 2008;Hale et al, 2016). While this paradigm has proven effective in revealing BE, the ratings reflect a subjective impression rather than objective performance (Liu et al, 2016).…”