바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.23 No.2

Citation Share

Does Familarity Affect the Processing of Nontarget Shapes?

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2011, v.23 no.2, pp.257-270
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2011.23.2.005


& (2011). Does Familarity Affect the Processing of Nontarget Shapes?. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 23(2), 257-270, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2011.23.2.005

Abstract

The present work examined whether familiar but ignored shapes are perceived. Rock and Gutman(1981) demonstrated these shapes were indeed not perceived in an incidental learning task. Cho and Kim(2010), however, reported that depending upon instructions, unfamiliar shapes were processed in the same task. Using an instruction of internal structure encoding, a series of experiments was conducted to explore whether a familiar but ignored shape was perceived while a target was attended. Experiment 1 compared recognition rates for the familiar but ignored shapes (heart, lips and a circle) with those of unfamiliar ones. To control familarity due to shape orientations, Experiment 2 presented participants with upside- down shapes. In two experiments, the familiar nontargets did not show higher recognition rates than did the novel nontargets. The present study demonstrated new evidence for perception of ignored shapes regardless of their familarity.

keywords
Nontarget recognition, form familarity, encoding internal structure, 비표적의 재인, 형태의 친숙성, 내적 구조의 약호화

Reference

1.

김지윤, 이향정, 김정오 (2010). 잔여용량이 비표적의 처리에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 22, 589-599.

2.

김희정, 김정오 (2010). 낯선 형태에 대한 연상이 비표적 형태의 지각에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 22, 161-176.

3.

박창호 (2010). 원은 좋은 형태인가? 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 22, 261-276.

4.

이주영 (2008). Rock과 Gutman (1981)의 현상적 형체설에 대한 반증 실험. 미발표 실습논문. 서울대학교 심리학과.

5.

조현욱, 김정오 (2010). 표적 형태의 내적/외적 구조의 약호화가 무주의 형태의 지각에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 22, 59-73.

6.

Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. NJ: Prentice-Hall.

7.

Lachter, J., Forster, K. I., & Ruthruff, E. (2004). Forty-five years after Broadbent: Still not identification without attention. Psychological Review, 111, 880-913.

8.

Rock, I. (1983). The logic of perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

9.

Rock, I. (1986). The description and analysis of object and event perception. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, and J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance: Vol. II Cognitive processes and performance. New York: Wiley.

10.

Rock, I., & Gutman, D. (1981). The effect of inattention on form perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 275-285.

11.

Rock, I., & Leaman (1963). An experimental analysis of symmetry. Acta Psychologica, 21, 171-183.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy