The Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory
Research
Recognition
and Spatial Processing in Perception and Imagery
To better understand how object- and spatial-properties are
processed in perception and imagery, we are using a variety of different
stimuli and population groups. For example, we have used "impossible objects" and "meaningful
vs. Meaningless shapes” in visual mental rotation tasks to investigate
the representational format and processes used in image transformation. We also
developed a spatial-object task that requires accessing object properties to
perform a spatial judgment in order to examine the processes that underlie
object recognition. We compared performance on this task with a purely
recognition task using objects that were presented in different everyday depth orientations as well as from
atypical noncanonical viewpoints, and morphed stimuli. We are currently examining how
familiarity with the objects and expertise determines performance on these
types of tasks.
Examining different population groups enables us to observe selective changes
in processing and thus to better understand the operations of the system and
its subcomponents. In addition to seeing the selective decline in the system
that occurs with ageing, we are also examining
selective cognitive enhancements with Air Force pilots
and fingerprint experts. This enables us to examine if, and in what ways,
experts differ in how they process information and identify visual patterns.
Our work with the Air Force and on object recognition has led us to investigate
the processes and representations used for aircraft identification. We are
currently examining how long lasting
representations, acquired during initial training, influence learning and
memory. Furthermore, the specific presentations used for training determine the
specificity of the representations. In
particular, the recognition process is dependent on the relative homogeneity/similarity
of the stimuli and the frame alignment of the examples used during training.
We are also applying this to the domain of forensic sciences, and in particular
to face and fingerprint identification. In the forensic science domain, in
addition to examining all of the issues above, we are also looking how
external, contextual, and top-down elements interact with the incoming
‘objective’ bottom-up information contained in the actual data. Our
research has already demonstrated that emotional
states and subliminal priming can influence how (& if) we determine that a
pair of fingerprints match or not. We are currently pursuing this line of
research extensively.
See BBC’s Newsnight interview with Dr. Dror on fingerprint identification.
See link to Forensic & Biometric Identification
See link to Training
See link to Cognition & Technology
Related publications:
Ashworth, A.R.S. & Dror,
Dror, I. E.,
Dror, I.E. & Charlton, D. (2006). Why experts make
errors. Journal of Forensic Identification, 56
(4), 600-616. [abstract]
Makany, T., Redhead E., & Dror,
Dror, I.E., Charlton, D., & Peron A.
(2006). Contextual information renders experts vulnerable to making
erroneous identifications Forensic Science International, 156
(1), 74-78. [abstract]
Busey, T. & Dror, I.E. (in press). Special
Abilities and Vulnerabilities in Forensic Expertise.
In A. McRoberts (Ed.) Friction Ridge
Sourcebook.
Dror, I.E.,
Peron, A., Hind, S., & Charlton, D. (2005). When emotions get the better of us: The effect of contextual
top-down processing on matching fingerprints. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(6),
799-809. [abstract]
Dror, I.E. and Rosenthal, R. (2008). Meta-analytically quantifying the reliability and biasability
of forensic experts. Journal of
Forensic Sciences, 53(4).
Pyke, J.N., Makany, T., Redhead. E.S., & Dror, I.E. (2008). The effects of forced spatial learning:
should we always follow the yellow
brick road? British Psychological Annual Meeting. Dublin.
Dror, I.E. and Fraser-Mackenzie, P. (in
press). Cognitive
biases in human perception, judgment, and decision making: Bridging theory and
the real world. In Press,
K. Rossmo (Ed.) Criminal Investigative Failures. Taylor & Francis Publishing.
Dror, I.E. (2005). Perception is far from perfection: The role of the brain and mind in constructing
realities. Brain and
Behavioural Sciences 28 (6), 763. [abstract]
Meadmore,
K., Bucks, R. S., & Dror,
Dror,
Dror, I.E. &
Dror,
Smith, W. & Dror,
Meadmore, K., Dror, I. E., & Bucks,
R.S. (in press). Lateralisation of spatial processing and age. Laterality.
Dror, I.E. (in press). Cognitive Science Serving
Security: Assuring useable and efficient biometric and technological solutions.
Aviation Security International.
Dror,
Dror, I. E., Ashworth, A.R.S., and
Dror,
Schmitz-Williams,
Smith, W., Dror, I.E.,
& Schmitz-Williams, I.C. (2006). The effect of decomposability and
meaningfulness on the representation and processing of visual information in
mental rotation. Journal of Mental
Imagery, 30, 113-124.
Dror,
Dror,
Dror, I. E., Schreiner, C.
S., Bovitz, B. W., Smith, K. M., & Calpin, S. (in preparation). What can a
spatial-object task tell us about object recognition?
Dror, I. E., Schreiner, C.
S., Winter, E., & Thompson K. (in preparation). Categorical and metric
spatial judgments in small and large scale environments.
Schreiner, C. S., Smith, K.
M., & Dror,
Ashworth, R. S., Dror,