Distortions in Visual Memory Reply to Engebretson and Huttenlocher (1996)

• Published in: Journal of experimental psychology. General Vol. 126; no. 3; pp. 312 - 314
• Main Authors: Tversky, Barbara, Schiano, Diane J
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Washington, DC American Psychological Association 01-09-1997
• Subjects: Biological and medical sciences; Eyes & eyesight; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Graphical Displays; Human; Human Information Storage; Learning. Memory; Memory; Psychology; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychology. Psychophysiology; Spatial Organization; Human; Error; Critical study; Cognition; Visual memory
• ISSN: 0096-3445; 1939-2222
• DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.126.3.312

P. H. Engebretson and J. Huttenlocher (1996) commented on an article by the authors (B. Tversky & D. Schiano, 1989) in which the authors reported that the same lines or curves were distorted in memory differently when interpreted as graph elements than as map elements. In subsequent work (D. Schiano & B. Tversky, 1992), the authors found a different pattern of error for meaningless lines, a pattern consistent with a well-known perceptual effect, the tilt illusion. Engebretson and Huttenlocher's comment was primarily directed at this tilt-illusion account. The comment presented an alternative explanation that was based on a model of J. Huttenlocher, L. V. Hedges, and S. Duncan (1991) and reported 2 experiments on uninterpreted stimuli. The results of those experiments, however, are consistent with established findings in the tilt-illusion and memory-interference literatures.