Zachariou Valentinos, Del Giacco Amanda C, Ungerleider Leslie G, Yue Xiaomin
Laboratory of Brain and Cognition, NIMH/NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.
J Vis. 2018 Nov 1;18(12):3. doi: 10.1167/18.12.3.
Animate and inanimate objects differ in their intermediate visual features. For instance, animate objects tend to be more curvilinear compared to inanimate objects (e.g., Levin, Takarae, Miner, & Keil, 2001). Recently, it has been demonstrated that these differences in the intermediate visual features of animate and inanimate objects are sufficient for categorization: Human participants viewing synthesized images of animate and inanimate objects that differ largely in the amount of these visual features classify objects as animate/inanimate significantly above chance (Long, Stormer, & Alvarez, 2017). A remaining question, however, is whether the observed categorization is a consequence of top-down cognitive strategies (e.g., rectangular shapes are less likely to be animals) or a consequence of bottom-up processing of their intermediate visual features, per se, in the absence of top-down cognitive strategies. To address this issue, we repeated the classification experiment of Long et al. (2017) but, unlike Long et al. (2017), matched the synthesized images, on average, in the amount of image-based and perceived curvilinear and rectilinear information. Additionally, in our synthesized images, global shape information was not preserved, and the images appeared as texture patterns. These changes prevented participants from using top-down cognitive strategies to perform the task. During the experiment, participants were presented with these synthesized, texture-like animate and inanimate images and, on each trial, were required to classify them as either animate or inanimate with no feedback given. Participants were told that these synthesized images depicted abstract art patterns. We found that participants still classified the synthesized stimuli significantly above chance even though they were unaware of their classification performance. For both object categories, participants depended more on the curvilinear and less on the rectilinear, image-based information present in the stimuli for classification. Surprisingly, the stimuli most consistently classified as animate were the most dangerous animals in our sample of images. We conclude that bottom-up processing of intermediate features present in the visual input is sufficient for animate/inanimate object categorization and that these features may convey information associated with the affective content of the visual stimuli.
有生命和无生命的物体在其中间视觉特征上存在差异。例如,与无生命物体相比,有生命物体往往更具曲线性(例如,莱文、高江、米纳和凯尔,2001年)。最近的研究表明,有生命和无生命物体中间视觉特征的这些差异足以用于分类:人类参与者在观看具有大量这些视觉特征差异的有生命和无生命物体的合成图像时,将物体分类为有生命/无生命的准确率显著高于随机水平(朗、斯托默和阿尔瓦雷斯,2017年)。然而,一个悬而未决的问题是,观察到的分类是自上而下的认知策略(例如,矩形形状不太可能是动物)的结果,还是在没有自上而下认知策略的情况下,对其中间视觉特征进行自下而上处理的结果。为了解决这个问题,我们重复了朗等人(2017年)的分类实验,但与朗等人(2017年)不同的是,我们平均匹配了合成图像中基于图像和感知到的曲线和直线信息的数量。此外,在我们的合成图像中,全局形状信息没有保留,图像呈现为纹理图案。这些变化阻止了参与者使用自上而下的认知策略来完成任务。在实验过程中,向参与者展示这些合成的、类似纹理的有生命和无生命图像,并且在每次试验中,要求他们在没有反馈的情况下将其分类为有生命或无生命。参与者被告知这些合成图像描绘的是抽象艺术图案。我们发现,即使参与者不知道自己的分类表现,他们对合成刺激的分类准确率仍然显著高于随机水平。对于这两种物体类别,参与者在分类时更多地依赖刺激中存在的曲线信息,而较少依赖基于图像的直线信息。令人惊讶的是,在我们的图像样本中,最一致地被分类为有生命的刺激物是最危险的动物。我们得出结论,视觉输入中存在的中间特征的自下而上处理足以进行有生命/无生命物体的分类,并且这些特征可能传达与视觉刺激的情感内容相关的信息。