Functional Differences Between Upright and Rotated Images

In Experiment I subjects imaged an alphanumeric character either upright or upside-down, and triggered a test display character. Their task was to decide as quickly as possible whether the test character was NORMAL or MIRRORED. On 72% of the trials the test was at the orientation imaged. Reaction time (RT) was then about 200 ms longer in the upside-down image condition. This difference reduced with practice. On the remaining trials the orientation of the test character differed from that of the prepared image. For upright images RT increased monotonically with the angular difference in orientation between test and image. For upside-down images RT did not increase monotonically with angular difference as there was a wide dip around the upright. Further experiments suggested that upside-down images can be rotated, but at considerably slower rates than upright ones, and that the apparent rates of rotation for upside-down images are dependent upon the width of the sector tested. These results indicate that visual short-term memory (STM) and long-term memory (LTM) are distinct; that the process of mental rotation does not operate directly upon LTM; and that functionally, upright and rotated images may differ in important ways.     

What’s up in mental rotation?

We report two experiments on the influence of head tilt on mental rotation. In Experiment I, subjects decided whether dot patterns were or were not repeated about a line. Their reaction times (RTs) were consistent with the interpretation that they mentally rotated the patterns so that the line was subjectively vertical before making their decisions. When the subjects tilted their heads, the RT functions shifted in the direction of the tilt, indicating that the subjective vertical lay closer to the retinal than to the gravitational vertical. In Experiment II, subjects decided whether singly presented alphanumeric characters in various orientations were standard or backward (mirror-reversed). Again, analysis of their RTs suggested mental rotation to the standard upright, but the function was unaffected by head tilt; in this case, the subjects operated in subjective gravitational rather than retinal coordinates. The choice of retinal or gravitational coordinates may depend on whether the stimuli are interpreted egocentrically or as part of the external world.     

Response set effects in recognition memory

In three experiments, Ss responded to individual digits or letters according to whether or not each was in some prememorized list. There were either two possible responses (yes-no condition) or a single response (yes-only and no-only conditions). With memory sets of one, two, or four digits, RT was a linear function of memory set size. The slope of the function was least under the yes-only condition and greatest under the yes-no condition. Nonspecific practice had little effect on any of the slopes. With memory sets of 4, 8, or 12 letters, the slopes under the yes-only and yes-no conditions did not seem to differ, and practice with specific sets flattened the function considerably in both cases. Overall, the errors under the yes-no condition were mostly false alarms, those under the no-only condition mostly misses, and those under the yes-no condition were divided about equally. The results are interpreted partially in terms of a multiple-observations model of decision time.     

On the perception of symmetrical and repeated patterns

Four experiments investigated rapid perceptual judgments about tachistoscopically presented patterns that were either symmetrical about or repeated across a vertical axis. The same patterns were presented under two different instructional conditions; some Ss were to judge the two halves of each pattern “same” or “mirror,” others were to judge each pattern as a whole “symmetrical” or “asymmetrical.” With dot patterns, RTs were faster for symmetrical than for repeated patterns when the two halves were close together, but not when they were separated, regardless of instructions. With simpler patterns made up of arrowheads and C-shapes, however, “same” RTs were faster than “mirror,” but “asymmetrical” RTs were marginally slower than “symmetrical,” regardless of spatial separation. The advantage of “same” over “mirror” did not seem to be simply a labeling effect. The results suggest that left-right symmetry is perceptually more salient than left-right repetition when the patterns are perceived holistically. By contrast, distinct patterns can be matched more rapidly when they are the same than when they are left-right mirror images.     

Detection of symmetry as a function of angular orientation.

Subjects decided as quickly as possible whether dot patterns were or were not symmetrical about a line. Their decision times were shorter when the line was verticle and increased as the angle between the line and the verticle increased. This orientation function was essentially the same whether or not the subjects knew in advance what the orientation of the line would be. When the subjects tilted their heads, the function shifted in the direction of the head tilt, indicating that it was tied more closely to retinal than to gravitational coordinates. These data can be interpreted to mean that people mentally rotate patterns to a vertical orientation before judging their symmetry. This in turn suggests that the "template" for detecting symmetry may itself be embedded symmetrically in the brain.