Mental rotation and perceptual uprightness

Hock, Howard S.; Tromley, Cheryl L.

doi:10.3758/bf03198779

Cited by 51 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This flattening effect is commonly observed in studies of mental rotation, and has been interpreted to mean that subjects do not always mentally rotate the characters the full angular distance to the upright (Cooper & Shepard, 1973;Hock & Tromley, 1978). It is less marked in the patterns condition than in the control condition, and less marked still in the digits condition.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Is mental rotation controlled or automatic?

Corballis

1986

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Is mental rotation controlled or automatic?

Corballis

1986

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although adults are capable of flexibly using different spatial reference systems, Hock and Hilton (1979) have shown that conflicting spatial reference systems can present difficulty, for children, in coding the orientation of visual stimuli. Furthermore, such factors as the shape of a figure (Hock & Tromley, 1978) and the choice of spatial reference system (Banks & Stolarz, 1975;Corwin et al, 1977) can influence how broadly subjects "tune" the orientation of a stimulus. The results of the present study add to this literature concerning the coding of orientation information by showing that the inclusion of a memory requirement in the subject's task can have a decisive influence on whether orientation coding will rely on an objective (gravitational) or retinal spatial reference system.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative spatial reference systems: Intentional vs. incidental learning

Hock

Sullivan

1981

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Subjects were initially shown unfamiliar polygons while their heads were tilted and were then tested for their ability to recognize the polygons when their heads were upright. The objective (gravitational) orientation of the polygons during acquisition affected recognition accuracy only when the polygons were acquired under intentional learning instructions. When acquisition was incidental, evidence for the retention of retinally referenced memory representations was obtained. These results were consistent with a review of previous literature indicating that the use of a task requiring either the storage or retrieval of information from memory is a necessary (although not sufficient) condition for obtaining an effect of objective orientation on performance.

show abstract

“…The idea has been to reduce the number of stored representations used to recognize an object. Although shape recognition seems relatively insensitive to changes in size and location (Corcoran, 1971;Deutsch, 1955;Sutherland, 1960Sutherland, , 1968Sutherland & Carr, 1963), it can be perturbed by changes in orientation' (Attneave & Olson, 1967;Attneave & Reid, 1968;Corballis, Anuza, & Blake, 1978;Corballis & Roldan, 1975;Corballis, Zbrodoff, & Roldan, 1976;Hock & Tromley, 1978;Quinlan, 1991;Rock, 1973Rock, , 1983Rock, DiVita, & Barbeito, 1981;Rock & Leaman, 1963). This sensitivity has been used to argue for gravitational rather than intrinsic frames of reference.…”

Section: Inertial Frames Of Referencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The alternatives have included a retinal (Corballis & Roldan, 1975;Sutherland, 1968), a gravitational (Hock & Tromley, 1978;Rock, 1973Rock, , 1983, and an intrinsic (based on properties of object shape) frame of reference (Hinton, 1981a(Hinton, , 1981b(Hinton, , 1981cHock & Tromley, 1978;Marr, 1982;Wiser, 1981). The controversy has been conditioned by the assumption that perception proceeds by constructing descriptions of objects.…”

Section: Inertial Frames Of Referencementioning

confidence: 99%

Center of mass perception and inertial frames of reference

Bingham

Muchisky

1993

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Center of mass perception was investigated by varying the shape, size, and orientation of planar objects. Shape was manipulated to investigate symmetries as information. The number of reflective symmetry axes, the amount of rotational symmetry, and the presence of radial symmetry were varied. Orientation affected systematic errors. Judgments tended to undershoot the center of mass. Random errors increased with size and decreased with symmetry. Size had no effect on random errors for maximally symmetric objects, although orientation did. The spatial distributions of judgments were elliptical. Distribution axes were found to align with the principle moments of inertia. Major axes tended to align with gravity in maximally symmetric objects. A functional and physical account was given in terms of the repercussions of error. Overall, judgments were very accurate.

show abstract

Mental rotation and perceptual uprightness

Cited by 51 publications

References 7 publications

Is mental rotation controlled or automatic?

Is mental rotation controlled or automatic?

Alternative spatial reference systems: Intentional vs. incidental learning

Center of mass perception and inertial frames of reference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About