Active manual control of object views facilitates visual recognition.

Active exploration of large-scale environments leads to better learning of spatial layout than does passive observation [1] [2] [3]. But active exploration might also help us to remember the appearance of individual objects in a scene. In fact, when we encounter new objects, we often manipulate them so that they can be seen from a variety of perspectives. We present here the first evidence that active control of the visual input in this way facilitates later recognition of objects. Observers who actively rotated novel, three-dimensional objects on a computer screen later showed more efficient visual recognition than observers who passively viewed the exact same sequence of images of these virtual objects. During active exploration, the observers focused mainly on the 'side' or 'front' views of the objects (see also [4] [5] [6]). The results demonstrate that how an object is represented for later recognition is influenced by whether or not one controls the presentation of visual input during learning.

Encoding 'regular' and 'random' sequences of views of novel three-dimensional objects.

When we look at an object as we move or the object moves, our visual system is presented with a sequence of different views of the object. It has been suggested that such regular temporal sequences of views of objects contain information that can aid in the process of representing and recognising objects. We examined whether seeing a series of perspective views of objects in sequence led to more efficient recognition than seeing the same views of objects but presented in a random order. Participants studied images of 20 novel three-dimensional objects rotating in depth under one of two study conditions. In one study condition, participants viewed an ordered sequence of views of objects that was assumed to mimic important aspects of how we normally encounter objects. In the other study condition, participants were presented the same object views, but in a random order. It was expected that studying a regular sequence of views would lead to more efficient recognition than studying a random presentation of object views. Although subsequent recognition accuracy was equal for the two groups, differences in reaction time between the two study groups resulted. Specifically, the random study group responded reliably faster than the sequence study group. Some possible encoding differences between the two groups are discussed.