Purchase this article with an account.
Christopher Dickinson, Sarah Hinnant, Odessa-Nanette Fields, Kimberly Fiorentino, Robert Gucwa, Hailey Kerr, Marco Alcivar Perez, Emily Philipps, Chase Simonet, Bridget Wasowski, Alannah Marie Wray; Object motion impacts false memory for the space depicted in scene views (at least locally): A conceptual effect of motion on boundary extension?. Journal of Vision 2015;15(12):114. doi: 10.1167/15.12.114.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
Does motion impact false memory for scene views’ spatial expanse (i.e., boundary extension)? Some researchers (e.g., DeLucia & Maldia, 2006; Munger, Owens, & Conway, 2005) have tested this question using simulated self-motion (e.g., an object in a scene was shown approaching the viewer), and they generally found greater boundary extension for scenes with simulated self-motion than for static scenes, contrary to predictions based on representational momentum (i.e., boundary restriction). In three experiments, we showed participants scenes with a single object appearing in three locations to simulate leftward or rightward motion – similar to standard representational-momentum paradigms. All backgrounds were color photographs of natural backgrounds (e.g., a field, a forest, a courtyard), and all objects were capable of motion (e.g., a beach ball, a horse, a rollerblader). On each trial, the background was shown continuously for 1.25 s; the object appeared in each location for 250 ms with a 250-ms ISI. Object motion was either forward or backward (relative to the object) and was either coherent (e.g., left, center, right) or incoherent (e.g., center, left, right). Four black borders surrounded all pictures. After a 250-s masked interval, a test picture appeared with the object in the exact same location in which it appeared before the mask. Participants’ task was to recreate remembered stimulus views by adjusting any of the picture’s four borders (test-picture border position was identical to stimulus-picture border position). Across three experiments, we found that for forward motion, participants moved the border closest to the object significantly closer to the object; for backward motion, participants moved the border closest to the object significantly farther away from it. This implies a conceptual effect of motion (e.g., Reed & Vinson, 1996) on false memory for scene views’ spatial expanse. Implications for the relationship between boundary extension and representational momentum will be discussed.
Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2015
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only