The time it takes humans to discriminate rotated objects from their mirror images increases linearly with the rotation angle. This phenomenon is probably due to an analogue mode of visual information processing during which an object’s mental representation is rotated in a time-consuming process called mental rotation. As the speed of mental rotation in humans depends on rotation axis, we tested the ability of a California sea lion to mentally rotate perspective line drawings of three-dimensional objects about four axes. In a matching-to-sample experiment the animal was presented with the image and a mirror image of a block sample that had previously been shown upright. Both image and mirror image were rotated by a multiple of 60° about the object’s x-, y-, z-axis, or a skew axis (an axis oblique to these standard orthogonal axes). The animal’s choice and reaction times were recorded using a computer-controlled touch-screen device. Mean reaction times and errors generally increased with angular disparity supporting the model of mental rotation for three-dimensional objects. Linear regression analysis of mean reaction times yielded high correlation coefficients only for three axes. The slope of reaction time functions indicated the highest mental rotation speed for the skew axis. This contrasts with the priority of mental rotation axes in humans suggesting that due to special ecological demands a different mode of orientation invariance evolved in marine mammals.

Keywords:
Mental rotation, Mental representation, Visual information processing, Cognitive ecology, Comparative cognition, Mammal, California sea lion
1.
Bauer, B., and P. Jolicoeur (1996) Stimulus dimensionality effects in mental rotation. J. Exp. Psychol. Human Percept. Perf., 22: 82–94.
2.
Berthoz, A. (1991) Reference frames for the perception and control of movement. In Brain and Space (ed. by J. Paillard), Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 81–111.
3.
Bethell-Fox, C.E., and R.N. Shepard (1988) Mental rotation: Effects of stimulus complexity and familiarity. J. Exp. Psychol. Human Percept. Perf., 14: 12–23.
4.
Carpenter, M., and D.R. Proffitt (2001) Comparing viewer and array mental rotations indifferent planes. Mem. Cogn., 29: 441–448.
5.
Cooper, L.A., and P. Podgorny (1976) Mental transformations and visual comparison processes: Effects of complexity and similarity. J. Exp. Psychol. Human Percept. Perf., 2: 503–514.
6.
Corballis, M.C., and S. Cullen (1986) Decisions about axes of disoriented shapes. Mem. Cogn., 14: 27–38.
7.
Corballis, M.C., and H. McMaster (1996) The roles of stimulus-response compatability and mental rotation in mirror-image and left-right decisions. Can. J. Exp. Psychol., 50: 397–401.
8.
Corballis, M.C., B.A. Nagourney, L.I. Shetzer, and G. Stefanatos (1978) Mental rotation under head tilt: factors influencing the location of the subjective reference frame. Percept. Psychophys., 24: 263–273.
9.
Delius, J.D., and V.D. Hollard (1995) Orientation invariant pattern recognition by pigeons (Columba livia) and humans (Homo sapiens). J. Comp. Psychol., 109: 278–290.
10.
Diwadkar, V.A., and T.P. McNamara (1997) Viewpoint dependence in scene recognition. Psychol. Sci., 8: 302–307.
11.
Fagot, J. (ed.) (2000) Picture perception in animals. Psychology Press Ltd., Hove.
12.
Folk, M.D., and R.D. Luce (1987) Effects of stimulus complexity on mental rotation rate of polygons. J. Exp. Psychol. Human Percept. Perf., 13: 395–404.
13.
Friedman, A., and C.A. Harding (1990) Seeing versus imagining movement in depth. Can. J. Psychol., 44: 371–383.
14.
Friedman, A., and D.J. Pilon (1994) Effects of distance between objects and distance from the vertical axis on shape identity judgements. Mem. Cogn., 22: 552–564.
15.
Gaunet, F., and A. Berthoz (2000) Spatial rotation for spatial environment recognition. Cogn. Brain Res., 9: 91–102.
16.
Gellerman, L.W. (1933) Chance orders of alternating stimuli in visual discrimination experiments. J. Genet. Psychol., 42: 206–208.
17.
Hall, D.L., and A. Friedman (1994) Shape discriminations of three-dimensional objects depend on number and location of bends. Percept. Psychophys., 56: 288–300.
18.
Hobson, E.S. (1966) Visual orientation and feeding in seals and sea lions. Nature, 210: 326–327.
19.
Hochberg, J., and L. Gellmann (1977) The effect of landmark features on mental rotation times. Mem. Cogn., 5: 23–26.
20.
Hock, H.S., and K. Ross (1975) The effect of familiarity on rotational transformations. Percept. Psychophys., 18: 15–20.
21.
Hock, H.S., and C.L. Tromley (1978) Mental rotation and perceptual uprightness. Percept. Psychophys., 24: 529–533.
22.
Hollard, V.D., and J.D. Delius (1982) Rotational invariance in visual pattern recognition by pigeons and humans. Science, 218: 804–806.
23.
Hubona, G.S., G.W. Shirah, and D.G. Fout (1997) The effects of motion and stereopsis on three-dimensional visualization. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud., 47: 609–627.
24.
Just, M.A., and P.A. Carpenter (1985) Cognitive coordinate systems: Accounts of mental rotation and individual differences in spatial ability. Psychol. Rev., 92: 137–171.
25.
Kail, R. (1986) The impact of extended practice on rate of mental rotation. J. Exp. Child Psychol., 49: 227–244.
26.
Kail, R., and Y. Park (1990) Impact of practice on speed of mental rotation. J. Exp. Child Psychol., 49: 378–391.
27.
Koriat, A., and J. Norman (1985) Mental rotation and visual familiarity. Percept. Psychophys., 37: 429–439.
28.
Leone, G., M. Lipshits, V. Gurfinkel, and A. Berthoz (1995) Influence of graviceptive cues at different levels of visual information processing: The effect of prolonged weightlessness. Acta Astronautica, 36: 743–751.
29.
Mauck, B., and G. Dehnhardt (1997) Mental rotation in a California sea lion (Zalophus californianus). J. Exp. Biol., 200: 1309–1326.
30.
Mittelstaedt, H. (1983) A new solution to the problem of the subjective vertical. Naturwissenschaften, 70: 272–281.
31.
Paillard, J. (1991) Motor and representational framing of space. In Brain and Space (ed. by J. Paillard), Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 163–182.
32.
Pani, J.R. (1993) Limits on the comprehension of rotational motion: mental imagery of rotations with oblique components. Perception, 22: 785–808.
33.
Pani, J.R., C.T. William, and G.T. Shippey (1995) Determinants of the perception of rotational motion: Orientation of the motion to the object and to the environment. J. Exp. Psychol. Human Percept. Perf., 21: 1441–1456.
34.
Parsons, L.M. (1987) Visual discrimination of abstract mirror-reflected three-dimensional objects at many orientations. Percept. Psychophys., 42: 49–59.
35.
Pinker, S. (1984) Visual cognition: An introduction. Cognition, 18: 1–63.
36.
Schusterman, R.J., and T. Thomas (1966) Shape dicrimination and transfer in the California sea lion. Psychonom. Sci., 5: 21–22.
37.
Shepard, R.N., and S. Hurwitz (1984) Upward direction, mental rotation and discrimination of left and right turns in maps. Cognition, 18: 161–193.
38.
Shepard, R.N., and J. Metzler (1971) Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171: 701–703.
39.
Shepard, S., and D. Metzler (1988) Mental rotation: Effects of dimensionality of objects and type of task. J. Exp. Psychol. Human Percept. Perf., 14: 3–11.
40.
Wohlschläger, A. (2001) Mental objects rotation and the planning of hand movements. Percept. Psychophys., 63: 709–718.
41.
Wohlschläger, A., and A. Wohlschläger (1998) Mental and manual rotation. J. Exp. Psychol. Human Percept. Perf., 24: 397–412.
© 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel
2003
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.