Meaningfulness in Figure - Ground Organization
 
 
 
Explain
Glossary

Chapter 4. Meaningfulness in Figure - Ground Organization

Demonstration 4.1
true
true
You must read each slide, and complete any questions on the slide, in sequence.
true
title

Meaningfulness in Figure - Ground Organization

Participate in an experiment to assess whether the meaningfulness of shapes affects figure - ground organization.

CLICK ANYWHERE TO BEGIN

At first, we may have trouble seeing what this photo shows. But when we recognize that it is a landscape, we can perceive it as two figures—the landscape and its reflection.
Photo: © Design Pics/Corbis.

Does Meaningfulness Influence Figure–Ground Organization?

It seems reasonable to assume that, in order to recognize an object, we must first identify its shape—that is, we must first perform figure–ground organization, segregating figure from ground so we can assess the figure shape and see if it matches the shape of some object in our memory. However, this assumption appears to be incorrect—that is, it seems that object recognition can occur before figure–ground organization. This was shown in a 1994 experiment by Peterson and Gibson (the experiment on which this demonstration is based). To understand what this observation means, consider the two images below:



For the image on the left, people are about as likely to say that the white part is figure and the black part is ground as they are to say the opposite, that the black part is figure and the white part is ground. For the image on the right, however, people are much more likely to say that the black part is figure and the white part is ground. This is the case even if the image is shown very briefly—for just 100 milliseconds in the present demonstration and for as little as 28 milliseconds in the original 1994 experiment.

The two images are matched in terms of their visual features, such as the overall areas of the black and white regions, so the best explanation for this result is that the meaningfulness of the shape plays a role in identifying figure and ground. That is, it seems that the visual system recognizes the object before performing figure–ground organization.


Images © Peterson, M.A. & Gibson. B.S. (1994). "Must Figure–Ground Organization Precede Object Recognition? An Assumption in Peril." Psychological Science, Vol 5, issue 5, 253-259. This material is reproduced with permission of SAGE Publications.

activity_4_1_slide_2
This simulated experiment consists of a sequence of 12 trials. In each trial, you'll see an image like the one below, presented very briefly.
Each image will consist of a black region on the left and a white region on the right or vice versa.
You might perceive the left or right region as "figure" (that is, as having an objectlike shape) and the other region as "ground"
(that is, as a background for the object like shape).
After you see each image, you'll have to indicate which region looked more like "figure"—the region on the left or the region on the right.
CLICK ANYWHERE TO BEGIN

Images © Peterson, M.A. & Gibson. B.S. (1994). "Must Figure–Ground Organization Precede Object Recognition? An Assumption in Peril." Psychological Science, Vol 5, issue 5, 253-259. This material is reproduced with permission of SAGE Publications.

activity_4_1_slide_3
You haven't completed the activity on this screen. If you leave this screen now, any work you've done on the screen will be lost. Are you sure you want to leave?

Which region looked more like "figure"?

CLICK ANYWHERE TO SEE FIRST IMAGE
Trial 1 of 12
explain_text

Your results cannot be displayed because you didn't complete all the trials.
You can finish the trials and see your results, or you can proceed to the next screen.

During this experiment, you saw the 12 images below—6 with upright objectlike shapes and 6 with the objectlike shapes inverted.
You saw each image for just 100 milliseconds (0.1 second).
Participants in this type of experiment typically identify upright objectlike shapes as "figure" significantly more often
than they identify inverted object like shapes as "figure."
How do your results compare to the typical results?
Images with upright objectlike shapes

Images with inverted objectlike shapes

Your results
Upright objectlike shapes you identified as "figure"
0
Inverted objectlike shapes you identified as "figure"
0
Non-objectlike shapes you identified as "figure"
0
Images © Peterson, M.A. & Gibson. B.S. (1994). "Must Figure–Ground Organization Precede Object Recognition? An Assumption in Peril." Psychological Science, Vol 5, issue 5, 253-259. This material is reproduced with permission of SAGE Publications.
explain_text

Does Meaningfulness Influence Figure–Ground Organization?

It seems reasonable to assume that, in order to recognize an object, we must first identify its shape—that is, we must first perform figure—ground organization, segregating figure from ground so we can assess the figure shape and see if it matches the shape of some object in our memory. However, this assumption appears to be incorrect—that is, it seems that object recognition can occur before figure–ground organization. This was shown in a 1994 experiment by Peterson and Gibson (the experiment on which this demonstration is based). To understand what this observation means, consider the two images below:

For the image on the left, people are about as likely to say that the white part is figure and the black part is ground as they are to say the opposite, that the black part is figure and the white part is ground. For the image on the right, however, people are much more likely to say that the black part is figure and the white part is ground. This is the case even if the image is shown very briefly—for just 100 milliseconds in the present demonstration and for as little as 28 milliseconds in the original 1994 experiment.

The two images are matched in terms of their visual features, such as the overall areas of the black and white regions, so the best explanation for this result is that the meaningfulness of the shape plays a role in identifying figure and ground. That is, it seems that the visual system recognizes the object before performing figure–ground organization.

Images © Peterson, M.A. & Gibson. B.S. (1994). "Must Figure–Ground Organization Precede Object Recognition? An Assumption in Peril." Psychological Science, Vol 5, issue 5, 253-259. This material is reproduced with permission of SAGE Publications.

You must select an answer and then click SUBMIT before you can proceed to the next screen.
test_single_choice

Select your answer to the question below. Then click SUBMIT.

If the image to the right is presented very briefly, why will people be likely to say that the white region on the right is "figure" and the black region on the left is "ground"?

A.
People are more likely to identify a white region as "figure" than a black region.
B.
The region on the right has the shape of a recognizable object.
C.
People are more likely to identify a shape on the right as "figure" than a shape on the left.
D.
People consciously realize that the white region looks like a pineapple.
Correct! Click EXPLAIN if you want to review this topic.
Incorrect.
The correct answer is B.
Click EXPLAIN if you want to review this topic.

Image © Peterson, M.A. & Gibson. B.S. (1994). "Must Figure–Ground Organization Precede Object Recognition? An Assumption in Peril." Psychological Science, Vol 5, issue 5, 253-259. This material is reproduced with permission of SAGE Publications.

You must select an answer and then click SUBMIT before you can proceed to the next screen.
test_single_choice

Select your answer to the question below. Then click SUBMIT.

The images to the right show a partial map of the United States. Suppose these images were presented very briefly in random order, as in this demonstration. In which would the white region probably be perceived as "figure"? In which would the black region probably be perceived as "figure"? In which would the black and white regions be equally likely to be perceived as "figure"?

A.
White probably perceived as "figure"—4; Black probably perceived as "figure"—2; Black and white equally likely to be perceived as "figure"—1, 3.
B.
White probably perceived as "figure"—3, 4; Black probably perceived as "figure"—1, 2; Black and white equally likely to be perceived as "figure"—none.
C.
White probably perceived as "figure"—3; Black probably perceived as "figure"—1; Black and white equally likely to be perceived as "figure"—2, 4.
D.
White probably perceived as "figure"—1, 4; Black probably perceived as "figure"—2, 3; Black and white equally likely to be perceived as "figure"—none.
Correct! Click EXPLAIN if you want to review this topic.
Incorrect.
The correct answer is A.
Click EXPLAIN if you want to review this topic.
You must complete the question and then click SUBMIT before you can proceed to the next screen.
test_single_choice

Select your answer to the question below. Then click SUBMIT.

Why are the results of the 1994 experiment by Peterson and Gibson noteworthy?

A.
The experiment showed that people have difficulty recognizing inverted objects.
B.
The experiment showed that figure–ground organization is performed very rapidly and without conscious awareness.
C.
The experiment showed that object recognition can precede figure–ground organization.
D.
The experiment showed that object recognition is a very time-consuming process.
Correct! Click EXPLAIN if you want to review this topic.
Incorrect.
The correct answer is C.
Click EXPLAIN if you want to review this topic.
You must select an answer and then click SUBMIT before you can proceed to the next screen.
test_single_choice

Select your answer to the question below. Then click SUBMIT.

The image on the bottom is identical to the image on top, except that it has been inverted. Assuming that people would be equally likely to see the white area in both images as having the shape of an upright vase, why would you expect figure–ground organization of the two images to differ or not to differ?

A.
Figure–ground organization in the two images WOULD NOT differ, because in both images the white and the black areas would be equally likely to be identified as figure.
B.
Figure–ground organization in the two images WOULD NOT differ, because both images contain the same shapes and the same areas of black and white.
C.
Figure–ground organization in the two images WOULD differ, because in the image on top the black areas look like upright faces, and in the image on bottom the faces are inverted.
D.
Figure–ground organization in the two images WOULD differ, because in the image on top the bowl of the vase is wider than the base, but in the image on bottom the base is wider than the bowl.
Correct! Click EXPLAIN if you want to review this topic.
Incorrect.
The correct answer is C.
Click EXPLAIN if you want to review this topic.
Activity Complete!
You have completed the activity
Meaningfulness in Figure - Ground Organization.
Sensation & Perception LaunchPad Solo © 2016 Worth Publishers. All rights reserved.