English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Visual object detection, categorization, and identification tasks are associated with different time courses and sensitivities

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons83877

de la Rosa,  S
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;
Project group: Cognitive Engineering, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons83859

Choudhery,  RN
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons83857

Chatziastros,  A
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

de la Rosa, S., Choudhery, R., & Chatziastros, A. (2011). Visual object detection, categorization, and identification tasks are associated with different time courses and sensitivities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(1), 38-47. doi:10.1037/a0020553.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-BC9A-A
Abstract
Recent evidence suggests that the recognition of an object's presence and its explicit recognition are temporally closely related. Here we re-examined the time course (using a fine and a coarse temporal resolution) and the sensitivity of three possible component processes of visual object recognition. In particular, participants saw briefly presented (Experiment I to III) or noise masked (Experiment IV) static images of objects and non-object textures. Participants reported the presence of an object, its basic level category, and its subordinate category while we measured recognition performance by means of accuracy and reaction times. All three recognition tasks were clearly separable in terms of their time course and sensitivity. Finally, the use of a coarser temporal sampling of presentation times decreased performance differences between the detection and basic level categorization task suggesting that a fine temporal sampling for the dissociation of recognition performances is important. Overall the three probed recognition processes were associated with different time courses and sensitivities.