• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

个体在物体识别方面的差异。

Individual differences in object recognition.

机构信息

Department of Psychology.

Department of Neuroscience.

出版信息

Psychol Rev. 2019 Mar;126(2):226-251. doi: 10.1037/rev0000129.

DOI:10.1037/rev0000129
PMID:30802123
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6484857/
Abstract

There is substantial evidence for individual differences in personality and cognitive abilities, but we lack clear intuitions about individual differences in visual abilities. Previous work on this topic has typically compared performance with only 2 categories, each measured with only 1 task. This approach is insufficient for demonstration of domain-general effects. Most previous work has used familiar object categories, for which experience may vary between participants and categories, thereby reducing correlations that would stem from a common factor. In Study 1, we adopted a latent variable approach to test for the first time whether there is a domain-general object recognition ability, o. We assessed whether shared variance between latent factors representing performance for each of 5 novel object categories could be accounted for by a single higher-order factor. On average, 89% of the variance of lower-order factors denoting performance on novel object categories could be accounted for by a higher-order factor, providing strong evidence for o. Moreover, o also accounted for a moderate proportion of variance in tests of familiar object recognition. In Study 2, we assessed whether the strong association across categories in object recognition is due to third-variable influences. We find that o has weak to moderate associations with a host of cognitive, perceptual, and personality constructs and that a clear majority of the variance in and covariance between performance on different categories is independent of fluid intelligence. This work provides the first demonstration of a reliable, specific, and domain-general object recognition ability, and suggest a rich framework for future work in this area. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

有大量证据表明人格和认知能力存在个体差异,但我们对视觉能力的个体差异缺乏清晰的直觉。以前关于这个主题的工作通常只比较两种分类的表现,每种分类只用一项任务来衡量。这种方法不足以证明领域一般性效应。以前的大多数工作都使用了熟悉的物体类别,对于这些类别,参与者之间的经验和类别可能会有所不同,从而减少了由于共同因素而产生的相关性。在研究 1 中,我们采用了潜在变量的方法,首次测试是否存在一种领域一般性的物体识别能力 o。我们评估了代表 5 个新物体类别的每个类别的表现的潜在因素之间的共享方差是否可以由单个高阶因素来解释。平均而言,5 个新物体类别表示性能的较低阶因素的方差中有 89%可以由高阶因素来解释,这为 o 提供了强有力的证据。此外,o 还解释了熟悉物体识别测试中中等比例的方差。在研究 2 中,我们评估了物体识别中跨类别强烈关联是否归因于第三变量的影响。我们发现,o 与许多认知、感知和人格结构的关联较弱到中等,并且不同类别之间的表现和协方差的大部分差异独立于流体智力。这项工作首次证明了一种可靠、特定和领域一般性的物体识别能力,并为该领域的未来工作提供了一个丰富的框架。

相似文献

1
Individual differences in object recognition.个体在物体识别方面的差异。
Psychol Rev. 2019 Mar;126(2):226-251. doi: 10.1037/rev0000129.
2
Novel and familiar object recognition rely on the same ability.识别新事物和熟悉事物的能力是相同的。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2022 Mar;151(3):676-694. doi: 10.1037/xge0001100. Epub 2021 Sep 16.
3
Measuring object recognition ability: Reliability, validity, and the aggregate z-score approach.测量物体识别能力:可靠性、有效性和综合 z 分数方法。
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Oct;56(7):6598-6612. doi: 10.3758/s13428-024-02372-w. Epub 2024 Mar 4.
4
General object recognition is specific: Evidence from novel and familiar objects.一般物体识别具有特异性:来自新物体和熟悉物体的证据。
Cognition. 2017 Sep;166:42-55. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.05.019. Epub 2017 May 26.
5
Skills and cautiousness predict performance in difficult search.技能和谨慎度预测困难搜索中的表现。
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2024 Aug;86(6):1897-1912. doi: 10.3758/s13414-024-02923-5. Epub 2024 Jul 12.
6
All categories are equal, but some categories are more equal than others: The psychometric structure of object and face cognition.所有类别都是平等的,但有些类别比其他类别更平等:物体与面部认知的心理测量结构。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2018 Aug;44(8):1254-1268. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000511. Epub 2018 Jun 28.
7
The nature of creativity: The roles of genetic factors, personality traits, cognitive abilities, and environmental sources.创造力的本质:遗传因素、个性特征、认知能力和环境来源的作用。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2016 Aug;111(2):230-49. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000087. Epub 2016 Jan 21.
8
"Same but different": Associations between multiple aspects of self-regulation, cognition, and academic abilities.“相同但又不同”:自我调节的多个方面、认知和学术能力之间的关联。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2019 Dec;117(6):1164-1188. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000224. Epub 2018 Dec 13.
9
Individual differences in spelling ability influence phonological processing during visual word recognition.拼写能力的个体差异会影响视觉单词识别过程中的语音处理。
Cognition. 2019 Jun;187:139-149. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.02.015. Epub 2019 Mar 13.
10
Domain-specific experience determines individual differences in holistic processing.领域特定经验决定整体加工的个体差异。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2020 Jan;149(1):31-41. doi: 10.1037/xge0000628. Epub 2019 May 30.

引用本文的文献

1
Ultra-high resolution imaging of laminar thickness in face-selective cortex in autism.自闭症患者面孔选择性皮层中层厚度的超高分辨率成像
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2025 Apr 30. doi: 10.3758/s13415-025-01298-w.
2
Enhanced and idiosyncratic neural representations of personally typical scenes.个人典型场景的增强型和特质性神经表征。
Proc Biol Sci. 2025 Mar;292(2043):20250272. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2025.0272. Epub 2025 Mar 26.
3
Measuring visual ability in linguistically diverse populations.在语言多样化人群中测量视觉能力。

本文引用的文献

1
How faces (and cars) may become special.面部(以及汽车)如何变得特殊。
Vision Res. 2019 Apr;157:202-212. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2017.12.007. Epub 2018 Sep 27.
2
All categories are equal, but some categories are more equal than others: The psychometric structure of object and face cognition.所有类别都是平等的,但有些类别比其他类别更平等:物体与面部认知的心理测量结构。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2018 Aug;44(8):1254-1268. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000511. Epub 2018 Jun 28.
3
General object recognition is specific: Evidence from novel and familiar objects.
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Dec 30;57(1):36. doi: 10.3758/s13428-024-02579-x.
4
The time course of stimulus-specific perceptual learning.刺激特异性知觉学习的时程。
J Vis. 2024 Apr 1;24(4):9. doi: 10.1167/jov.24.4.9.
5
Challenges in replication: Does amygdala gray matter volume relate to social network size?复制的挑战:杏仁核灰质体积与社交网络规模有关吗?
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2024 Aug;24(4):707-719. doi: 10.3758/s13415-024-01185-w. Epub 2024 Mar 28.
6
Domain Specificity vs. Domain Generality: The Case of Faces and Words.领域特异性与领域一般性:面孔与单词的案例
Vision (Basel). 2023 Dec 21;8(1):1. doi: 10.3390/vision8010001.
7
Measuring object recognition ability: Reliability, validity, and the aggregate z-score approach.测量物体识别能力:可靠性、有效性和综合 z 分数方法。
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Oct;56(7):6598-6612. doi: 10.3758/s13428-024-02372-w. Epub 2024 Mar 4.
8
Distinct but related abilities for visual and haptic object recognition.视觉和触觉物体识别的不同但相关的能力。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2024 Oct;31(5):2148-2159. doi: 10.3758/s13423-024-02471-x. Epub 2024 Feb 21.
9
How general is ensemble perception?整体感知有多普遍?
Psychol Res. 2024 Apr;88(3):695-708. doi: 10.1007/s00426-023-01883-z. Epub 2023 Oct 20.
10
Selecting police super-recognisers.选拔警方超级识别员。
PLoS One. 2023 May 17;18(5):e0283682. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0283682. eCollection 2023.
一般物体识别具有特异性:来自新物体和熟悉物体的证据。
Cognition. 2017 Sep;166:42-55. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.05.019. Epub 2017 May 26.
4
On the Complexity of Item Response Theory Models.项目反应理论模型的复杂性
Multivariate Behav Res. 2017 Jul-Aug;52(4):465-484. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2017.1309262. Epub 2017 Apr 20.
5
The reliability and stability of visual working memory capacity.视觉工作记忆容量的可靠性和稳定性。
Behav Res Methods. 2018 Apr;50(2):576-588. doi: 10.3758/s13428-017-0886-6.
6
Developing the Leuven Embedded Figures Test (L-EFT): testing the stimulus features that influence embedding.开发鲁汶嵌入式图形测试(L-EFT):测试影响嵌入的刺激特征。
PeerJ. 2017 Jan 24;5:e2862. doi: 10.7717/peerj.2862. eCollection 2017.
7
Gender differences in recognition of toy faces suggest a contribution of experience.对玩具面孔识别的性别差异表明经验起到了一定作用。
Vision Res. 2016 Dec;129:69-76. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2016.10.003. Epub 2016 Nov 3.
8
Is the Bifactor Model a Better Model or Is It Just Better at Modeling Implausible Responses? Application of Iteratively Reweighted Least Squares to the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale.双因素模型是一个更好的模型,还是仅仅在对不合理反应进行建模方面表现更好?迭代加权最小二乘法在罗森伯格自尊量表中的应用。
Multivariate Behav Res. 2016 Nov-Dec;51(6):818-838. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2016.1243461. Epub 2016 Nov 11.
9
Confidence intervals for correlations when data are not normal.数据非正态时相关性的置信区间。
Behav Res Methods. 2017 Feb;49(1):294-309. doi: 10.3758/s13428-016-0702-8.
10
Measurement Model Quality, Sample Size, and Solution Propriety in Confirmatory Factor Models.验证性因素模型中的测量模型质量、样本量与解的恰当性
Multivariate Behav Res. 2006 Mar 1;41(1):65-83. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr4101_5.