Towards the most prägnant Gestalt: Leveling and sharpening as contextually dependent adaptive strategies.
Bias
Complication
Drawing
Gestalt psychology
Simplification
Journal
Memory & cognition
ISSN: 1532-5946
Titre abrégé: Mem Cognit
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0357443
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Jul 2023
25 Jul 2023
Historique:
accepted:
29
06
2023
medline:
25
7
2023
pubmed:
25
7
2023
entrez:
25
7
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Gestalt psychologists posited that we always organize our visual input in the best way possible under the given conditions. Both weakening or removing unnecessary details (i.e., leveling) and exaggerating distinctive features (i.e., sharpening) can contribute to achieving a better organization. When is a feature leveled or sharpened, however? We investigated whether the importance of a feature for discrimination among alternatives influences which organizational tendency occurs. Participants were simultaneously presented with four figures composed of simple geometrical shapes, and asked to reconstruct one of these figures in such a way that another participant would be able to recognize it among the alternatives. The four figures differed either qualitatively or only quantitatively (i.e., far or close context). Regarding quantitative differences, two feature dimensions were varied, with one manifesting a wider range of variability across the alternatives than the other. In case of a smaller variability range, the target figure was either at the extreme of the range or had an in-between value. As expected, the results indicated that sharpening occurred more often for the feature with an extreme value, for the feature exhibiting more variability, and for the features of figures presented in the close context, than for the feature with a non-extreme value, exhibiting less variability, or in the far context. In line with Metzger's (1941) definition of prägnant Gestalts, the essence of a Gestalt is context-dependent, and this will influence whether leveling or sharpening of a feature will lead to the best organization in the specific context.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37490231
doi: 10.3758/s13421-023-01445-z
pii: 10.3758/s13421-023-01445-z
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.
Références
Allport, G. W. (1930). Change and decay in the visual memory image. British Journal of Psychology, 21(2), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1930.tb00581.x
doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1930.tb00581.x
Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and visual perception. University of California Press.
doi: 10.1525/9780520351271
Arnheim, R. (1975). Anwendungen gestalttheoretischer Prinzipien auf die Kunst [Applications of Gestalt theoretical principles to art]. In S. Ertel, L. Kemmler, & M. Stadler (Eds.), Gestalttheorie in der modernen Psychologie [Gestalt theory in modern psychology] (pp. 278–284). Steinkopff. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-72312-4_28
doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-72312-4_28
Arnheim, R. (1986). The two faces of Gestalt psychology. American Psychologist, 41(7), 820–824. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.7.820
doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.41.7.820
Aust, F., & Barth, M. (2020). papaja: Create APA manuscripts with R Markdown. Retrieved from https://github.com/crsh/papaja
Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge University Press.
Blake, A. B., Nazarian, M., & Castel, A. D. (2015). The Apple of the mind’s eye: Everyday attention, metamemory, and reconstructive memory for the Apple logo. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(5), 858–865. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.1002798
doi: 10.1080/17470218.2014.1002798
pubmed: 25721103
Brewer, W. F., & Treyens, J. C. (1981). Role of schemata in memory for places. Cognitive Psychology, 13(2), 207–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(81)90008-6
doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(81)90008-6
Bürkner, P.-C. (2017). brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software, 80(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01
doi: 10.18637/jss.v080.i01
Burkner, P.-C. (2018). Advanced Bayesian multilevel modeling with the R package brms. The R Journal, 10(1), 395–411. https://doi.org/10.32614/RJ-2018-017
doi: 10.32614/RJ-2018-017
Carmichael, L., Hogan, H. P., & Walter, A. A. (1932). An experimental study of the effect of language on the reproduction of visually perceived form. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15(1), 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0072671
doi: 10.1037/h0072671
Chamberlain, R., & Wagemans, J. (2016). The genesis of errors in drawing. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 65, 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.04.002
doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.04.002
Cohen, D. J. (2005). Look little, look often: The influence of gaze frequency on drawing accuracy. Perception & Psychophysics, 67(6), 997–1009. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193626
doi: 10.3758/BF03193626
Cohen, D. J., & Bennett, S. (1997). Why can’t most people draw what they see? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 23(3), 609–621. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.23.3.609
doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.23.3.609
pubmed: 9180037
de Leeuw, J. R. (2015). jsPsych: A JavaScript library for creating behavioral experiments in a web browser. Behavior Research Methods, 47(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0458-y
doi: 10.3758/s13428-014-0458-y
pubmed: 24683129
Dunn, J. C. (1983). Spatial metrics of integral and separable dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 9(2), 242–257. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.9.2.242
doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.9.2.242
pubmed: 6221069
Fan, J. E., Yamins, D. L. K., & Turk-Browne, N. B. (2018). Common object representations for visual production and recognition. Cognitive Science, 42(8), 2670–2698. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12676
doi: 10.1111/cogs.12676
pubmed: 30125986
pmcid: 6497164
Fan, J. E., Hawkins, R. D., Wu, M., & Goodman, N. D. (2020). Pragmatic inference and visual abstraction enable contextual flexibility during visual communication. Computational Brain & Behavior, 3(1), 86–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42113-019-00058-7
doi: 10.1007/s42113-019-00058-7
Fehrer, E. V. (1935). An investigation of the learning of visually perceived forms. The American Journal of Psychology, 47(2), 187–221. https://doi.org/10.2307/1415826
doi: 10.2307/1415826
Feldman, J. (2000). Bias toward regular form in mental shape spaces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26(1), 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.26.1.152
doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.26.1.152
pubmed: 10696611
Feldman, J. (2021). Mutual information and categorical perception. Psychological Science, 32(8), 1298–1310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797621996663
doi: 10.1177/0956797621996663
pubmed: 34283691
pmcid: 8726593
Gati, I., & Tversky, A. (1982). Representations of qualitative and quantitative dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8(2), 325–340.
pubmed: 6461725
Gibson, J. J. (1929). The reproduction of visually perceived forms. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0072470
doi: 10.1037/h0072470
Goldmeier, E. (1972). Similarity in visually perceived forms. International Universities Press.
Granit, A. R. (1922). A study on the perception of form. British Journal of Psychology. General Section, 12(3), 223–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1922.tb00055.x
doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1922.tb00055.x
Hammad, S., Juricevic, I., Rajani, S., & Kennedy, J. (2008). Angle illusion on a picture’s surface. Spatial Vision, 21(3–5), 451–462. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856808784532554
doi: 10.1163/156856808784532554
pubmed: 18534114
Holzman, P. S., & Gardner, R. W. (1960). Leveling-sharpening and memory organization. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61(2), 176–180. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0041295
doi: 10.1037/h0041295
pubmed: 13715615
Hubbell, M. B. (1940). Configurational properties considered ’good’ by naive subjects. The American Journal of Psychology, 53(1), 46–69. https://doi.org/10.2307/1415960
doi: 10.2307/1415960
Hüppe, A. (1984). Prägnanz - ein gestalttheoretischer Grundbegriff: Experimentelle Untersuchungen [Prägnanz - a basic concept in gestalt theory: Experimental investigations]. Profil-Verlag.
Kennedy, G. J., Orbach, H. S., & Loffler, G. (2008). Global shape versus local feature: An angle illusion. Vision Research, 48(11), 1281–1289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2008.03.003
doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2008.03.003
pubmed: 18430451
Koffka, K. (1935). Principles of Gestalt psychology. Harcourt, Brace; Company.
Köhler, W. (1993). Letter to Abraham S. Luchins (1951) The principle of Prägnanz is probably in need of a revised formulation. Gestalt Theory, 15(3–4), 297–298. (Original work published 1951).
Koutstaal, W., & Schacter, D. L. (1997). Gist-based false recognition of pictures in older and younger adults. Journal of Memory and Language, 37(4), 555–583. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1997.2529
doi: 10.1006/jmla.1997.2529
Lee, K., Byatt, G., & Rhodes, G. (2000). Caricature effects, distinctiveness, and identification: Testing the face-space framework. Psychological Science, 11(5), 379–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00274
doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00274
pubmed: 11228908
Long, B., Fan, J. E., Huey, H., Chai, Z., & Frank, M. C. (2021). Parallel developmental changes in children’s production and recognition of line drawings of visual concepts [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/5yv7x
Long, B., Wang, Y., Christie, S., Frank, M. C., & Fan, J. E. (2022). Developmental consistency in children’s drawings of object categories [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/fpebs
Matthews, W. J., & Adams, A. (2008). Another reason why adults find it hard to draw accurately. Perception, 37(4), 628–630. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5895
doi: 10.1068/p5895
pubmed: 18546669
Mauro, R., & Kubovy, M. (1992). Caricature and face recognition. Memory & Cognition, 20(4), 433–440. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210927
doi: 10.3758/BF03210927
McCloud, S. (1993). Understanding comics: The invisible art. HarperCollins Publishers.
Metzger, W. (1941). Psychologie: Die Entwicklung ihrer Grundannahmen seit der Einführung des Experiments. [Psychology: The development of its basic assumptions since the introduction of the experiment.] Springer-Verlag. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-642-53395-2
Miller, M. B., & Gazzaniga, M. S. (1998). Creating false memories for visual scenes. Neuropsychologia, 36(6), 513–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(97)00148-6
doi: 10.1016/S0028-3932(97)00148-6
pubmed: 9705061
Mitchell, P., Ropar, D., Ackroyd, K., & Rajendran, G. (2005). How perception impacts on drawings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(5), 996–1003. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.31.5.996
doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.31.5.996
pubmed: 16262494
Ostrofsky, J., Kozbelt, A., & Seidel, A. (2012). Perceptual constancies and visual selection as predictors of realistic drawing skill. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(2), 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026384
doi: 10.1037/a0026384
Ostrofsky, J., Kozbelt, A., & Cohen, D. J. (2015). Observational drawing biases are predicted by biases in perception: Empirical support of the misperception hypothesis of drawing accuracy with respect to two angle illusions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(5), 1007–1025. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.973889
doi: 10.1080/17470218.2014.973889
Prasad, D., & Bainbridge, W. A. (2022). The visual Mandela effect as evidence for shared and specific false memories across people. Psychological Science, 33(12), 1971–1988. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976221108944
doi: 10.1177/09567976221108944
pubmed: 36219739
R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/
Rausch, E. (1966). Das Eigenschaftsproblem in der Gestalttheorie der Wahrnemung [The property problem in the Gestalt theory of perception]. In W. Metzger, R. Bergius, & H. Thomae (Eds.), Allgemeine Psychologie [General psychology] (pp. 866–953). Hogrefe.
Rhodes, G., & McLean, I. G. (1990). Distinctiveness and expertise effects with homogeneous stimuli: Towards a model of configural coding. Perception, 19(6), 773–794. https://doi.org/10.1068/p190773
doi: 10.1068/p190773
pubmed: 2130375
Rhodes, G., Brennan, S., & Carey, S. (1987). Identification and ratings of caricatures: Implications for mental representations of faces. Cognitive Psychology, 19(4), 473–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(87)90016-8
doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(87)90016-8
pubmed: 3677584
Robert, M. B. L. (1999). A unified account of the effects of caricaturing faces. Visual Cognition, 6(1), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/713756800
doi: 10.1080/713756800
Rodríguez, J., Bortfeld, H., Rudomín, I., Hernández, B., & Gutiérrez-Osuna, R. (2009). The reverse-caricature effect revisited: Familiarization with frontal facial caricatures improves veridical face recognition. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(5), 733–742. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1539
doi: 10.1002/acp.1539
pubmed: 21132058
pmcid: 2995276
Roediger, H. L., III., & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(4), 803–814. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.21.4.803
doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.21.4.803
Rosielle, L. J., & Hite, L. A. (2009). The caricature effect in drawing: Evidence for the use of categorical relations when drawing abstract pictures. Perception, 38(3), 357–375. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5831
doi: 10.1068/p5831
pubmed: 19485132
Schumann, F. (1914). Bericht über den VI. Kongreß für experimentelle Psychologie in Göttingen vom 15. Bis 18. April 1914. [Report on the VI Congress of Experimental Psychology in Göttingen from April 15 to 18, 1914]. Verlag von Johann Ambrosius Barth.
Seamon, J. G., Luo, C. R., Schlegel, S. E., Greene, S. E., & Goldenberg, A. B. (2000). False memory for categorized pictures and words: The category associates procedure for studying memory errors in children and adults. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(1), 120–146. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2676
doi: 10.1006/jmla.1999.2676
Steegen, S., Tuerlinckx, F., Gelman, A., & Vanpaemel, W. (2016). Increasing transparency through a multiverse analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(5), 702–712. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616658637
doi: 10.1177/1745691616658637
pubmed: 27694465
Stevenage, S. V. (1995). Can caricatures really produce distinctiveness effects? British Journal of Psychology, 86(1), 127–146.
doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1995.tb02550.x
Van Geert, E., & Wagemans, J. (2023). Prägnanz in visual perception [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/pxdg4
Wertheimer, M. (1923). Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt. II [Investigations into the teachings of Gestalt. II]. Psychologische Forschung, 4, 301–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00410640
doi: 10.1007/BF00410640
Wohlfahrt, E. (1932). Der Auffassungsvorgang an kleinen Gestalten; Ein Beitrag zur Psychologie des Vorgestaltserlebnisses [The perceptual process of small figures; A contribution to the psychology of pre-Gestalt experience]. Neue Psychologische Studien, 4, 347–414.
Wulf, E. (1922). Beiträge zur Psychologie der Gestalt. VI. Über die Veränderung yon Vorstellungen (Gedächtnis und Gestalt) [Contributions to the Psychology of Gestalt. VI. On the change of ideas (Memory and Gestalt)]. Psychologische Forschung, 1, 333–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-29583-0
doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-29583-0
Yang, J., & Fan, J. (2021). Visual communication of object concepts at different levels of abstraction. Journal of Vision, 21(9), 2951. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.21.9.2951
doi: 10.1167/jov.21.9.2951