Determinants of visual ambiguity resolution.

IF 6.4
Juan Linde-Domingo, Javier Ortiz-Tudela, Johannah Völler, Martin N Hebart, Carlos González-García
{"title":"Determinants of visual ambiguity resolution.","authors":"Juan Linde-Domingo, Javier Ortiz-Tudela, Johannah Völler, Martin N Hebart, Carlos González-García","doi":"10.1038/s44271-026-00441-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Visual inputs during natural perception are highly ambiguous: objects are frequently occluded, lighting conditions vary, and object identification depends significantly on prior experiences. However, why do certain images remain unidentifiable while others can be recognized immediately, and what visual features drive subjective clarification? To address these critical questions, we developed a unique dataset of 1854 ambiguous images and collected more than 100,000 ratings (from a total of 947 participants) evaluating their identifiability before and after seeing undistorted versions of the images. Relating the representations of a brain-inspired neural network model in response to our images with human ratings, we show that subjective identification depends largely on the extent to which higher-level visual features from the original images are preserved in their ambiguous counterparts. In line with these results, an image-level regression analysis showed that the subjective identification of ambiguous images was best explained by high-level visual dimensions. Notably, the predominance of higher-level features over lower-level ones softens after participants disambiguate the images, suggesting that the visual system flexibly shifts between top-down guessing to bottom-up matching after disambiguation. Moreover, we found that the process of ambiguity resolution was accompanied by a notable decrease in semantic distance and a greater consistency in object naming among participants. However, the relationship between information gained after disambiguation and subjective identification was non-linear, indicating that acquiring more information does not necessarily enhance subjective clarity. Instead, we observed a U-shaped relationship, suggesting that subjective identification improves when the acquired information either strongly matches or mismatches prior predictions. Collectively, these findings advance our understanding on how we resolve ambiguity and extract meaning from incomplete visual information.</p>","PeriodicalId":501698,"journal":{"name":"Communications Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13143824/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communications Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-026-00441-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Visual inputs during natural perception are highly ambiguous: objects are frequently occluded, lighting conditions vary, and object identification depends significantly on prior experiences. However, why do certain images remain unidentifiable while others can be recognized immediately, and what visual features drive subjective clarification? To address these critical questions, we developed a unique dataset of 1854 ambiguous images and collected more than 100,000 ratings (from a total of 947 participants) evaluating their identifiability before and after seeing undistorted versions of the images. Relating the representations of a brain-inspired neural network model in response to our images with human ratings, we show that subjective identification depends largely on the extent to which higher-level visual features from the original images are preserved in their ambiguous counterparts. In line with these results, an image-level regression analysis showed that the subjective identification of ambiguous images was best explained by high-level visual dimensions. Notably, the predominance of higher-level features over lower-level ones softens after participants disambiguate the images, suggesting that the visual system flexibly shifts between top-down guessing to bottom-up matching after disambiguation. Moreover, we found that the process of ambiguity resolution was accompanied by a notable decrease in semantic distance and a greater consistency in object naming among participants. However, the relationship between information gained after disambiguation and subjective identification was non-linear, indicating that acquiring more information does not necessarily enhance subjective clarity. Instead, we observed a U-shaped relationship, suggesting that subjective identification improves when the acquired information either strongly matches or mismatches prior predictions. Collectively, these findings advance our understanding on how we resolve ambiguity and extract meaning from incomplete visual information.

视觉歧义解决的决定因素。
自然感知过程中的视觉输入是高度模糊的:物体经常被遮挡,照明条件变化,物体识别很大程度上取决于先前的经验。然而,为什么某些图像仍然无法识别,而其他图像可以立即识别,哪些视觉特征驱动主观澄清?为了解决这些关键问题,我们开发了一个包含1854张模糊图像的独特数据集,并收集了超过10万个评分(来自总共947名参与者),在看到未扭曲的图像版本之前和之后评估它们的可识别性。将大脑启发的神经网络模型的表征与人类评分相关联,我们表明主观识别在很大程度上取决于原始图像中更高层次的视觉特征在其模糊对应图像中被保留的程度。与这些结果一致,图像水平的回归分析表明,模糊图像的主观识别最好的解释是高层次的视觉维度。值得注意的是,在消歧后,高阶特征对低阶特征的优势减弱,表明视觉系统在消歧后灵活地从自上而下的猜测转向自下而上的匹配。此外,我们发现歧义解决的过程伴随着参与者之间语义距离的显著减少和对象命名的更大一致性。然而,消歧义后获得的信息与主观识别之间的关系是非线性的,这表明获取更多的信息并不一定会提高主观清晰度。相反,我们观察到u形关系,表明当获得的信息与先前的预测强烈匹配或不匹配时,主观识别会提高。总的来说,这些发现促进了我们对如何从不完整的视觉信息中解决歧义和提取意义的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书