Scene perception: Detecting and judging objects undergoing relational violations

Five classes of relations between an object and its setting can characterize the organization of objects into real-world scenes. The relations are (1) Interposition (objects interrupt their background), (2) Support (objects tend to rest on surfaces), (3) Probability (objects tend to be found in some scenes but not others), (4) Position (given an object is probable in a scene, it often is found in some positions and not others), and (5) familiar Size (objects have a limited set of size relations with other objects). In two experiments subjects viewed brief (150 msec) presentations of slides of scenes in which an object in a cued location in the scene was either in a normal relation to its background or violated from one to three of the relations. Such objects appear to (1) have the background pass through them, (2) float in air, (3) be unlikely in that particular scene, (4) be in an inappropriate position, and (5) be too large or too small relative to the other objects in the scene. In Experiment I, subjects attempted to determine whether the cued object corresponded to a target object which had been specified in advance by name. With the exception of the Interposition violation, violation costs were incurred in that the detection of objects undergoing violations was less accurate and slower than when those same objects were in normal relations to their setting. However, the detection of objects in normal relations to their setting (innocent bystanders) was unaffected by the presence of another object undergoing a violation in that same setting. This indicates that the violation costs were incurred not because of an unsuccessful elicitation of a frame or schema for the scene but because properly formed frames interfered with (or did not facilitate) the perceptibility of objects undergoing violations. As the number of violations increased, target detectability generally decreased. Thus, the relations were accessed from the results of a single fixation and were available sufficiently early during the time course of scene perception to affect the perception of the objects in the scene. Contrary to expectations from a bottom-up account of scene perception, violations of the pervasive physical relations of Support and Interposition were not more disruptive on object detection than the semantic violations of Probability, Position and Size. These are termed semantic because they require access to the referential meaning of the object. In Experiment II, subjects attempted to detect the presence of the violations themselves. Violations of the semantic relations were detected more accurately than violations of Interposition and at least as accurately as violations of Support. As the number of violations increased, the detectability of the incongruities between an object and its setting increased. These results provide converging evidence that semantic relations can be accessed from the results of a single fixation. In both experiments information about Position was accessed at least as quickly as information on Probability. Thus in Experiment I, the interference that resulted from placing a fire hydrant in a kitchen was not greater than the interference from placing it on top of a mail ? in a street scene. Similarly, violations of Probability in Experiment II were not more detectable than violations of Position. Thus, the semantic relations which were accessed included information about the detailed interactions among the objects—information which is more specific than what can be inferred from the general setting. Access to the semantic relations among the entities in a scene is not deferred until the completion of spatial and depth processing and object identification. Instead, an object's semantic relations are accessed simultaneously with its physical relations as well as with its own identification.     

On the self-perpetuating nature of stereotypes about women and men

An experiment was conducted to investigate an interpersonal process that contributes to the perpetuation of stereotyped beliefs about women and men. Male-female pairs of unacquainted individuals interacted to negotiate a division of labor on a series of work-like tasks (that differed in their sex-role connotations) in a situation that permitted control over the information that male perceivers received about the apparent sex of female targets. The perceivers' beliefs about the sex of their targets initiated a chain of events that resulted in targets providing behavioral confirmation for perceivers' beliefs about their sex. Targets believed by perceivers to be male chose tasks relatively masculine in nature, and targets believed by perceivers to be female chose tasks relatively feminine in nature. Although this behavioral confirmation effect was initially elicited as reactions to overtures made by perceivers, it persevered so that eventually targets came to initiate behaviors “appropriate” to the sex with which they had been labeled by perceivers. The specific roles of perceivers and targets in the behavioral confirmation process are examined. Implications of these findings for the perpetuation of stereotyped beliefs about the sexes are discussed.     

Controllability and human stress: method, evidence and theory.

Concepts are defined and evidence reviewed on whether control reduces stress in man. Individuals seem to prefer instrumental control over an aversive event, seem to prefer to administer it to themselves, and are less aroused when waiting for a controllable event. When groups without control have equal predictability, having control is still less arousing; as potential (but unexercised) control seems to be. The evidence also suggests that controllable events may hurt less. Methodological weaknesses and empirical gaps in these data are pointed out. These data are grossly inconsistent with Relevant Feedback theory and rather inconsistent with Information-seeking theory and Safety Signal theory. A Minimax hypothesis is proposed: When individuals control aversive events, they believe relief to be caused by a stable source—their own response. This belief entails that maximum future danger will be minimized. When they have no control, they believe relief to be less stable, which entails no guarantee that maximum future danger will be minimized. The data are largely consistent with the Minimax hypothesis and wholly consistent when Minimax is supplemented by the premise that aversive events hurt less when encountered against a background of relaxation.     

Remembering plurals: Unit of coding and form of coding during serial recall

Subjects were required to recall lists of six words which had been presented visually in sequence. One or two of the words might be plural nouns. A substantial number of errors occurred in which the plural form became detached from its original root. This is taken as evidence for a morpheme-based code as opposed to a unitary word code. A significantly high proportion of these errors maintained the form of the plural ( /S/, /Z/ or (ЪZ/) which is considered evidence for a primarily phonological coding of the plural morpheme. There is however a suggestion that on some occasions the plural is coded morphemically—i.e., in a way which does not distinguish between the various plural endings.     

Affective and cognitive mediators of reactions to spatial invasions

At a crosswalk on a busy street, a confederate, sketching a drawing or not, stood close or far from a pedestrian for 10 sec before the street light indicated “Walk.” In the first study, pedestrians were given the opportunity to subsequently help this confederate or another accomplice by calling attention to a dropped pen. In the second study, crossing speeds were timed and pedestrians were asked to record their mood and reactions to “another pedestrian,” who happened to be the confederate. These studies tested and found evidence for both cognitive and arousal explanations of reactions to spatial invasions. Cognitive and attributional theories imply that characteristics of the invader are important mediators of reactions to the invasion. The close nonartist was judged to be more inappropriate, produced faster escape speeds, and was helped less than the close artist or the far confederates. Arousal explanations imply that any invasion produces a generalized reaction which would be unrelated to characteristics of the invader. The other accomplice was helped less when the subject had been invaded and this reduction in helping was unaffected by the artist manipulation. These findings suggest a general arousal response to any invasion with a subsequent reliance on cognitive interpretations.     

Acquisition and forgetting in monkeys' memory of informational object-reward associations

The first experiment showed the monkeys could recall whether an object had been rewarded with peanuts or with sultanas, two equally preferred foods. The second investigated the effect of rewarded trials with an object on monkeys' ability to recall a nonrewarded trial with the same object. The third demonstrated that monkeys could use the memory of reward to predict nonreward and the memory of nonreward to predict reward, in a Win-Shift Lose-Stay paradigm. The fourth found differences between Win-Shift Lose-Stay and Win-Stay Lose-Shift in the rate at which associations between objects and reward events were forgotten. These results are discussed in relation to D. L. Medin's (In A. M. Schrier, Ed., Behavioral primatology, Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1977, Vol. I, pp. 33–69) distinction between informational and hedonic effects of reward in monkeys. It is argued that the association between an object and a reward event is represented in memory by many independent traces, different traces recording the object's association with different attributes of the reward event.     

Aversive CS control of instrumental avoidance as a function of selected parameters and method of Pavlovian conditioning

Effects of aversive CSs upon dogs' instrumental avoidance responding were assessed as a function of the Pavlovian conditioning parameters using off-baseline (Experiment 1) and on-baseline (Experiment 2) conditioning procedures. In each experiment, three UCS intensitites (2, 6, and 10 mA) were crossed factorially with two CS-UCS intervals (10 and 90 sec) yielding six groups. After 4 days of conditioning, the CS-produced effects on avoidance were determined primarily by an interaction between Pavlovian procedure (off- versus on-baseline) and UCS intensity. With off-baseline conditioning, CS-produced facilitation of avoidance was an increasing function of the UCS intensity. However, with on-baseline conditioning, only the CS paired with weak UCS facilitated avoidance, and the CS paired with the strong UCS suppressed responding. This reversing parametric function poses problems for two-process motivational theories of avoidance.