• Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or My Tools.

A more recent version of this article was published on [01-10-2014]

The Ground Side of an Object

Perceived as Shapeless yet Processed for Semantics

  1. Joseph L. Sanguinetti1
  2. John J. B. Allen1
  3. Mary A. Peterson1,2
  1. 1Department of Psychology
  2. 2Cognitive Science Program, University of Arizona
  1. Joseph L. Sanguinetti, Department of Psychology, University of Arizona, 1503 E. University Blvd., Tucson, AZ 85721 E-mail: sanguine{at}email.arizona.edu

  1. Author Contributions J. L. Sanguinetti, M. A. Peterson, and J. J. B. Allen designed the experiments and wrote the manuscript. J. L. Sanguinetti recruited and ran participants. J. L. Sanguinetti and J. J. B. Allen processed the electroencephalogram data.

Abstract

Traditional theories of perception posit that only objects access semantics; abutting, patently shapeless grounds do not. Surprisingly, this assumption has been untested until now. In two experiments, participants classified silhouettes as depicting meaningful real-world or meaningless novel objects while event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded. The borders of half of the novel objects suggested portions of meaningful objects on the ground side. Participants were unaware of these meaningful objects because grounds are perceived as shapeless. In Experiment 1, in which silhouettes were presented twice, N400 ERP repetition effects indicated that semantics were accessed for novel silhouettes that suggested meaningful objects in the ground and for silhouettes that depicted real-world objects, but not for novel silhouettes that did not suggest meaningful objects in the ground. In Experiment 2, repetition was manipulated via matching prime words. This experiment replicated the effect observed in Experiment 1. These experiments provide the first neurophysiological evidence that semantic access can occur for the apparently shapeless ground side of a border.

Article Notes

  • Declaration of Conflicting Interests The authors declared that they had no conflicts of interest with respect to their authorship or the publication of this article.

  • Funding This work was supported by National Science Foundation Grant BCS 0960529 to M. A. Peterson.

  • Supplemental Material Additional supporting information may be found at http://pss.sagepub.com/content/by/supplemental-data

  • Received November 20, 2012.
  • Accepted July 23, 2013.

This Article

  1. Published online before print November 12, 2013, doi: 10.1177/0956797613502814 Psychological Science 0956797613502814
  1. » Abstract
  2. Full Text
  3. Full Text (PDF)
  4. Supplemental Material
    5. All Versions of this Article:
    1. Version of Record - Jan 10, 2014
    2. current version image indicatorOnlineFirst Version of Record - Nov 12, 2013
    What's this?

Share

expand collapse buttonOther journals by APS

Most