Huebner, Gesche M.Gesche M.HuebnerGegenfurtner, Karl R.Karl R.Gegenfurtner2022-11-182012-06-272022-11-182012http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:hebis:26-opus-88554https://jlupub.ub.uni-giessen.de/handle/jlupub/9645http://dx.doi.org/10.22029/jlupub-9033We examined the role of conceptual and visual similarity in a memory task for natural images. The important novelty of our approach was that visual similarity was determined using an algorithm [1] instead of being judged subjectively. This similarity index takes colours and spatial frequencies into account. For each target, four distractors were selected that were (1) conceptually and visually similar, (2) only conceptually similar, (3) only visually similar, or (4) neither conceptually nor visually similar to the target image. Participants viewed 219 images with the instruction to memorize them. Memory for a subset of these images was tested subsequently. In Experiment 1, participants performed a two-alternative forced choice recognition task and in Experiment 2, a yes/no-recognition task. In Experiment 3, testing occurred after a delay of one week. We analyzed the distribution of errors depending on distractor type. Performance was lowest when the distractor image was conceptually and visually similar to the target image, indicating that both factors matter in such a memory task. After delayed testing, these differences disappeared. Overall performance was high, indicating a large-capacity, detailed visual long-term memory.enNamensnennung 3.0 Internationalmemory taskconceptual and visual similaritynatural imagesalgorithmrecognition taskddc:150