Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-23T15:31:19.471Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Do Object Files Pick Out?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

E. J. Green
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Many authors have posited an “object file” system, which underlies perceptual selection and tracking of objects. Several have proposed that this system internalizes principles specifying what counts as an object and relies on them during tracking. Here I consider a popular view on which the object file system is tuned to entities that satisfy principles of three-dimensionality, cohesion, and boundedness. I argue that the evidence gathered in support of this view is consistent with a more permissive view on which object files select and track according to well-known perceptual organization criteria. Further evidence supplies positive support for the permissive view.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 85 , Issue 2 , April 2018 , pp. 177 - 200
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†.

I am grateful to Frankie Egan, Jacob Feldman, Chris Hill, Brian McLaughlin, Jake Quilty-Dunn, and Susanna Schellenberg for helpful discussion and comments. Comments from two Philosophy of Science reviewers led to significant improvements. Thanks also to audiences at the 2015 European Society for Philosophy and Psychology; University of Nevada, Reno; University of California, Irvine; MIT, and Northwestern University.

References

Bahrami, Bahador. 2003. “Object Property Encoding and Change Blindness in Multiple Object Tracking.” Visual Cognition 10:949–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barenholtz, Elan, and Feldman, Jacob. 2003. “Visual Comparisons within and between Object Parts: Evidence for a Single-Part Superiority Effect.” Vision Research 43:1655–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bertamini, Marco. 2006. “Who Owns the Contour of a Visual Hole?” Perception 35:883–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhatt, Ramesh S., Hayden, Angela, Kangas, Ashley, Zieber, Nicole, and Joseph, Jane E.. 2010. “Part Perception in Infancy: Sensitivity to the Short-Cut Rule.” Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics 72:1070–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, Timothy F., and Tenenbaum, Joshua B.. 2013. “A Probabilistic Model of Visual Working Memory: Incorporating Higher Order Regularities into Working Memory Capacity Estimates.” Psychological Review 120:85–109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brovold, Amanda, and Grush, Rick. 2012. “Towards an (Improved) Interdisciplinary Investigation of Demonstrative Reference.” In Perception, Realism, and the Problem of Reference, ed. Raftopoulos, Athanassios and Machamer, Peter, 11–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burge, Tyler. 2010. Origins of Objectivity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cacchione, Trix. 2013. “The Foundations of Object Permanence: Does Perceived Cohesion Determine Infants’ Appreciation of the Continuous Existence of Material Objects?” Cognition 128:397–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cameron, Patricia A., and Gallup, Gordon G.. 1988. “Shadow Recognition in Human Infants.” Infant Behavior and Development 11:465–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, Susan. 2009. The Origin of Concepts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, Susan, and Xu, Fei. 2001. “Infant Knowledge of Objects: Beyond Object Files and Object Tracking.” Cognition 80:179–213.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, Lin. 2005. “The Topological Approach to Perceptual Organization.” Visual Cognition 12:553–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Zhe. 2012. “Object-Based Attention: A Tutorial Review.” Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics 74:784–802.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheries, Erik W., Mitroff, Stephen R., Wynn, Karen, and Scholl, Brian J.. 2008. “Cohesion as a Constraint on Object Persistence in Infancy.” Developmental Science 11:427–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de-Wit, Lee, Milner, David, and Kentridge, Robert. 2012. “Shadows Remain Segmented as Selectable Regions in Object-Based Attention Paradigms.” i-Perception 3:150–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickie, Imogen. 2010. “We Are Acquainted with Ordinary Things.” In New Essays on Singular Thought, ed. Jeshion, Robin, 213–46. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Drew, Trafton, Horowitz, Todd S., Wolfe, Jeremy M., and Vogel, Edward K.. 2011. “Delineating the Neural Signatures of Tracking Spatial Position and Working Memory during Attentive Tracking.” Journal of Neuroscience 31:659–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, Jacob. 2007. “Formation of Visual ‘Objects’ in the Early Computation of Spatial Relations.” Perception and Psychophysics 69:816–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fodor, Jerry A. 1987. Psychosemantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, Jerry A., and Pylyshyn, Zenon W.. 2015. Minds without Meanings: An Essay on the Content of Concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fougnie, Daryl, and Marois, Rene. 2009. “Attentive Tracking Disrupts Feature Binding in Visual Working Memory.” Visual Cognition 17:48–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giralt, Nuria, and Bloom, Paul. 2000. “How Special Are Objects? Children’s Reasoning about Objects, Parts, and Holes.” Psychological Science 11:497–501.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, E. J. 2017. “A Layered View of Shape Perception.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 68 (2): 355–87.. doi:10.1093/bjps/axv042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haladjian, Harry H., and Pylyshyn, Zenon W.. 2008. “Object-Specific Preview Benefit Enhanced during Explicit Multiple Object Tracking.” Journal of Vision 8:497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, Donald D., and Richards, Whitman A.. 1984. “Parts of Recognition.” Cognition 18:65–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hollingworth, Andrew, and Rasmussen, Ian P.. 2010. “Binding Objects to Locations: The Relationship between Object Files and Visual Working Memory.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 36:543–64.Google ScholarPubMed
Horowitz, Todd S., and Kuzmova, Yoana. 2011. “Can We Track Holes?” Vision Research 51:1013–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Howe, Piers D., Incledon, Natalie C., and Little, Daniel R.. 2012. “Can Attention Be Confined to Just Part of a Moving Object? Revisiting Target-Distractor Merging in Multiple Object Tracking.” PLOS One 7:e41491.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Howe, Piers D. L., Holcombe, Alex O., Lapierre, Mark D., and Cropper, Simon J.. 2013. “Visually Tracking and Localizing Expanding and Contracting Objects.” Perception 42:1281–1300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huntley-Fenner, Gavin, Carey, Susan, and Solimando, Andrea. 2002. “Objects Are Individuals but Stuff Doesn’t Count: Perceived Rigidity and Cohesiveness Influence Infants’ Representations of Small Groups of Entities.” Cognition 85:203–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kahneman, Daniel, Treisman, Anne, and Gibbs, Brian J.. 1992. “The Reviewing of Object Files: Object-Specific Integration of Information.” Cognitive Psychology 24:175–219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kellman, Philip J., and Spelke, Elizabeth S.. 1983. “Perception of Partly Occluded Objects in Infancy.” Cognitive Psychology 15:483–524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kellman, Philip J., Spelke, Elizabeth S., and Short, Kenneth R.. 1986. “Infant Perception of Object Unity from Translatory Motion in Depth and Vertical Translation.” Child Development 57:72–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kimchi, Ruth. 2009. “Perceptual Organization and Visual Attention.” Progress in Brain Research 176:15–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luck, Steven J., and Vogel, Edward K.. 1997. “The Capacity of Visual Working Memory for Features and Conjunctions.” Nature 309:279–81.Google Scholar
Markman, Ellen M. 1990. “Constraints Children Place on Word Meanings.” Cognitive Science 14:57–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitroff, Stephen R., Arita, Jason T., and Fleck, Mathias S.. 2009. “Staying in Bounds: Contextual Constraints on Object-File Coherence.” Visual Cognition 17:195–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mitroff, Stephen R., Scholl, Brian J., and Wynn, Karen. 2004. “Divide and Conquer: How Object Files Adapt When a Persisting Object Splits into Two.” Psychological Science 15:420–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scholl, Brian J., and Wynn, Karen 2005. “One Plus One Equals One: The Effects of Merging on Object Files.” Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Toronto.Google Scholar
Murez, Michael, and Recanati, François. 2016. “Mental Files: An Introduction.” Review of Philosophy and Psychology 7:265–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, John D. 1985. “Squirrel Monkey Communication.” In Handbook of Squirrel Monkey Research, ed. Rosenblum, Leonard A. and Coe, Christopher L., 99–126. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, Ingrid R., and Jiang, Yuhong. 2002. “Is Visual Short-Term Memory Object Based? Rejection of the ‘Strong-Object’ Hypothesis.” Perception and Psychophysics 64:1055–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Palmer, Stephen E., Davis, Janet, Nelson, Rolf, and Rock, Irvin. 2008. “Figure-Ground Effects on Shape Memory for Objects versus Holes.” Perception 37:1569–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Palmer, Stephen E., and Rock, Irvin. 1994. “Rethinking Perceptual Organization: The Role of Uniform Connectedness.” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 1:29–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peterson, Dwight J., and Berryhill, Marian E.. 2013. “The Gestalt Principle of Similarity Benefits Visual Working Memory.” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 20:1282–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Porter, Katherine B., Mazza, Veronica, Garofalo, Annie, and Caramazza, Alfonso. 2016. “Visual Object Individuation Occurs over Object Wholes, Parts, and Even Holes.” Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics 78:1145–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pylyshyn, Zenon W. 2007. Things and Places: How the Mind Connects with the World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pylyshyn, Zenon W., and Storm, Ron W.. 1988. “Tracking Multiple Independent Targets: Evidence for a Parallel Tracking Mechanism.” Spatial Vision 3:179–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quinn, Paul C., and Bhatt, Ramesh S.. 2005. “Learning Perceptual Organization in Infancy.” Psychological Science 16:511–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rehman, Anis Ur, Kihara, Ken, Matsumoto, Akiko, and Ohtsuka, Sakuichi. 2015. “Attentive Tracking of Moving Objects in Real 3D Space.” Vision Research 109:1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rips, Lance J., and Hespos, Susan J.. 2015. “Divisions of the Physical World: Concepts of Objects and Substances.” Psychological Bulletin 141:786–811.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scholl, Brian J., and Leslie, Alan M.. 1999. “Explaining the Infant’s Object Concept: Beyond the Perception/Cognition Dichotomy.” In What Is Cognitive Science? ed. Lepore, Ernest and Pylyshyn, Zenon W., 26–73. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Scholl, Brian J., and Pylyshyn, Zenon W.. 1999. “Tracking Multiple Items through Occlusion: Clues to Visual Objecthood.” Cognitive Psychology 38:259–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scholl, Brian J., Pylyshyn, Zenon W., and Feldman, Jacob. 2001. “What Is a Visual Object? Evidence from Target Merging in Multi-Element Tracking.” Cognition 80:159–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, Manish, and Hoffman, Donald D.. 2001. “Part-Based Representations of Visual Shape and Implications for Visual Cognition.” Advances in Psychology 130:401–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, Manish, Seyranian, Gregory D., and Hoffman, Donald D.. 1999. “Parsing Silhouettes: The Short-Cut Rule.” Perception and Psychophysics 61:636–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spelke, Elizabeth S. 1990. “Principles of Object Perception.” Cognitive Science 14:29–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spelke, Elizabeth S. 1994. “Initial Knowledge: Six Suggestions.” Cognition 50:443–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spelke, Elizabeth S., Breinlinger, Karen, Macomber, Janet, and Jacobson, Kristen. 1992. “Origins of Knowledge.” Psychological Review 99:605–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
St. Clair, Rebecca, Huff, Markus, and Seiffert, Adriane E.. 2010. “Conflicting Motion Information Impairs Multiple Object Tracking.” Journal of Vision 10:1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tversky, Barbara. 1989. “Parts, Partonomies, and Taxonomies.” Developmental Psychology 25:983–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
vanMarle, Kristy, and Scholl, Brian J.. 2003. “Attentive Tracking of Objects versus Substances.” Psychological Science 14:498–504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wagemans, Johan, Elder, James H., Kubovy, Michael, Palmer, Stephen E., Peterson, Mary A., Singh, Manish, and von der Heydt, Rüdiger. 2012. “A Century of Gestalt Psychology in Visual Perception.” Pt. 1, “Perceptual Grouping and Figure-Ground Organization.” Psychological Bulletin 138:1172–1217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, Ben S., Ledgeway, Timothy, and Rocchi, Francesca. 2011. “Neural Computations Governing Spatiotemporal Pooling of Visual Motion Signals in Humans.” Journal of Neuroscience 31:4917–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woodman, Geoffrey F., Vecera, Shaun P., and Luck, Steven J.. 2003. “Perceptual Organization Influences Visual Working Memory.” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 10:80–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wynn, Karen, Bloom, Paul, and Chiang, Wen-Chi. 2002. “Enumeration of Collective Entities by 5-Month-Old Infants.” Cognition 83:B55–B62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xu, Yaoda. 2002. “Encoding Color and Shape from Different Parts of an Object in Visual Short-Term Memory.” Perception and Psychophysics 64:1260–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhou, Ke, Luo, Huan, Zhou, Tiangang, Zhuo, Yan, and Chen, Lin. 2010. “Topological Change Disturbs Object Continuity in Attentive Tracking.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107:21920–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zosh, Jennifer M., and Feigenson, Lisa. 2009. “Beyond ‘What’ and ‘How Many’: Capacity, Complexity, and Resolution of Infants’ Object Representations.” In The Origins of Object Knowledge, ed. Hood, Bruce M. and Santos, Laurie R., 25–51. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar