Pictorial Recognition as an Unlearned Ability: A Study of One Child's Performance

Hochberg, Julian; Brooks, Virginia

doi:10.2307/1420286

Cited by 326 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

106

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Children's understanding of objects and space emerges gradually under their development (Piaget and Inhelder 1956). Some studies show that children of two years recognize a real object from a picture even when they have never seen it in real life (Hochberg and Brooks 1962;Daehler, Perlmutter et al 1976;Harris, Kavanaugh et al 1997;Tomasello, Striano et al 1999;Striano, Rochat et al 2003;Younger and Johnson 2004). Other studies have found that children recognize the relationship between objects and pictures successfully when they are about one year old, but these are 3D models and 2D pictures made for the studies that are simpler than those in the real world (Rose, Gottfried et al 1983;Skouteris, McKenzie et al 1992;Younger and Johnson 2006).…”

Section: Comparing Different Shape Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

Örnkloo¹,

Hofsten²

2007

Developmental Psychology

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors examined 14-to 26-month-old infants' understanding of the spatial relationships between objects and apertures in an object manipulation task. The task was to insert objects with various cross-sections (circular, square, rectangular, ellipsoid, and triangular) into fitting apertures. A successful solution required the infant to mentally rotate the object to be fit into the aperture and use that information to plan the action. The object was presented standing up in half of the trials; in the other half, it was lying down. The results showed that infants solved the problem consistently from age 22 months and that a successful solution was associated with appropriate preadjustments before the hand arrived with the block to the aperture. No sex differences were found.

show abstract

Section: Comparing Different Shape Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

Örnkloo¹,

Hofsten²

2007

Developmental Psychology

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Pretechnological cultures produce costumes, totems, musical instruments, and tools that depict people or animals. Representational objects are historically and culturally ubiquitous, they have aesthetic, cultural, or ritual importance, and young children require little if any experience to perceive their depictive properties (Hochberg & Brooks, 1962). For these reasons, inability to coordinate representational and functional aspects would be a striking deficit.…”

Section: Experimental Rationalementioning

confidence: 99%

On having complex representations of things: Preschoolers use multiple words for objects and people.

Deák

Maratsos²

1998

Developmental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Applying several names to an entity (polynomy) reflects the ability to categorize entities in different ways. Two experiments demonstrate preschoolers' abilities to apply multiple labels to representational objects and to people. In Experiment 1, 3-and 4-year-olds labeled representational objects and verified labels for story characters. In both tasks children reliably produced or accepted several words per entity and accepted a high percentage of both class-inclusive and overlapping word pairs. These results were replicated in Experiment 2; 3-to 5-year-olds also completed appearance-reality and receptive vocabulary tests. The mean number of words produced in the labeling task was significantly related to receptive vocabulary, but not to appearance-reality performance. The results indicate that preschoolers represent an entity as belonging to multiple categories (e.g., dinosaur and crayon). Implications for cognitive and language development, particularly the appearance-reality distinctic/n and the mutual exclusivity bias, are discussed.The objects and organisms that inhabit our environment are complex and multifaceted, with many aspects and attributes. Any entity belongs to many different categories defined by particular aspects and attributes. Adults can conceptualize these categories and represent them by using a variety of words (i.e., category labels). For example, an organism may be labeled kitten, cat, feline, carnivore, mammal animal and pet. Some words highlight specific attributes; for example, kitten specifies an age-restricted category. Many words differ in inclusiveness; for example, cat is subordinate to animal. Such words form class-inclusion hierarchies. Other words form a cross-classification matrix in which the denoted categories overlap but are not inclusive (e.g., cat and pet). The ability to produce multiple words for an entity, denoting multiple categories with various semantic relations (i.e., inclusion; overlap), is referred to as polynomy, l

show abstract

“…The common assumption that line-drawing recognition is a learned or cultural phenomena is not supported by the evidence. In a convincing test of this conjecture, Hochberg and Brooks [15] describe the case of a 19-month-old human baby who had had no previous exposure to any kinds of two-dimensional images, yet was immediately able to recognize ordinary line drawings of known objects. It is true that there has been some research on the bottom-up derivation of depth directly from line drawings or the edges detected in a single image [2,3,27], including previous research by the author [20].…”

Section: Role Of Depth Reconstruction In Human Visionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional object recognition from single two-dimensional images

Lowe

1987

Artificial Intelligence

1,150

561

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A computer vision system has been implemented that can recognize threedimensional objects from unknown viewpoints in single gray-scale images. Unlike most other approaches, the recognition is accomplished without any attempt to reconstruct depth information bottom-up from the visual input. Instead, three other mechanisms are used that can bridge the gap between the two-dimensional image and knowledge of three-dimensional objects. First, a process of perceptual organization is used to form groupings and structures in the image that are likely to be invariant over a wide range of viewpoints. Second, a probabilistic ranking method is used to reduce the size of the search space during model based matching. Finally, a process of spatial correspondence brings the projections of three-dimensional models into direct correspondence with the image by solving for unknown viewpoint and model parameters. A high level of robustness in the presence of occlusion and missing data can be achieved through full application of a viewpoint consistency constraint. It is argued that similar mechanisms and constraints form the basis for recognition in human vision.

show abstract

Pictorial Recognition as an Unlearned Ability: A Study of One Child's Performance

Cited by 326 publications

References 0 publications

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

On having complex representations of things: Preschoolers use multiple words for objects and people.

Three-dimensional object recognition from single two-dimensional images

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About