Steven Pinker -- How the Mind Works - Hampshire High Italian ...

280 J HOW THE MIND WORKSFinally, we hit them with a flurry of new trials in which every shapeappeared at twenty-four evenly spaced orientations (again randomlyordered). We wanted to see how people dealt with the old shapes at thenew orientations. Every button-press was timed to the thousandth of asecond.According to the multiple-view theory, people should create a separatememory file for every orientation in which an object commonlyappeared. For example, they would set up a file showing what Shape 3looks like right-side up (which is how they learned it), and then a secondfile for what it looks like at four o'clock and a third for seveno'clock. The people should soon recognize Shape 3 at these orientationsvery quickly. When we then surprised them with the same shapes atnew orientations, however, they should take much longer, because theywould have to interpolate a new view between the familiar ones toaccommodate it. The new orientations should all take an extra incrementof time.According to the mental-rotation theory, people should be quick torecognize the shape when it is upright, and slower and slower the fartherit has been misoriented. An upside-down shape should take the longest,because it needs a full 180-degree turn; the four o'clock shape should bequicker, for it needs only 120 degrees, and so on.According to the geon theory, orientation shouldn't matter at all. Peoplewould learn the objects by mentally describing the various arms andcrosses in a coordinate system centered on the object. Then, when a testshape flashed on the screen, it should make no difference if it was sideways,tilted, or upside down. Overlaying a frame should be quick andfoolproof, and the shape's description relative to the frame would matchthe memory model every time.The envelope, please. And the winner is . . .All of the above. People definitely stored several views: when a shapeappeared in one of its habitual orientations, people were very quick toidentify it.And people definitely rotate shapes in their minds. When a shapeappeared at a new, unfamiliar orientation, the farther it would have to berotated to be aligned with the nearest familiar view, the more time peopletook.And at least for some shapes, people use an object-centered referenceframe, as in the geon theory. Tarr and I ran a variant of the experiment inwhich the shapes had simpler geometries: