Perception Flashcards

(64 cards)

1
Q

What type of theory is Gregory’s?

A

Top-down theory of perception

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What type of theory is Gibson’s?

A

Bottom-up direct theory of perception

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Primary cues in perception

A

Not dependent on experience

Work on the fact we have binocular vision

  • Convergence
  • Retinal disparity
  • Accommodation (only monocular cue)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Convergence

A

Primary cue

Work on the fact we have binocular vision

Muscles of eye contract and pull eyes inwards when we focus on a item near to us

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Retinal disparity

A

Primary cue

Work on the fact we have binocular vision

Eyes are about 6cm apart so receive slightly different information

Brain combines two images in a process called stereopsis

Uses this new stereoptic image to judge depth - greater disparity of image between eyes, closer it is

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Stereopsis

A

Process that combines the images received from each eye into a single stereoptic image

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Accommodation

A

Only monocular primary cue

Lens change shape depending on whether the viewed object is nearby or far away

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Secondary cues in perception

A

Most of the monocular cues classed as secondary cues

Depend on learning and experience

One example is texture gradient

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Gibson and Walk

A

Visual cliff experiment - black and white checked material

36 infants, 6-14 months old

Found that infants wouldn’t cross the ‘drop’ to mothers

If they toppled over near the edge they showed a fear reaction

Concluded that infants had an innate awareness of depth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Gibson’s theory of perception

A

Bottom-up direct

Believed that information from the eyes lead directly to perception

Perception is innate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Gregory’s theory of perception

A

Top-down

Constructivist

Perception is based on learning and schemas

Unconscious process

We hypothesise about what we see

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Hudson

A

Showed a 2D image of a man (foreground) pointing a spear at a antelope (foreground) with a elephant in the gap between them in the background to different African cultures

When asked what the man was pointing his spear at they said the elephant

Didn’t’ understand depth cues like overlap that we use in Western culture to perceive depth in photos

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Optic array (Gibson)

A

The structure of light in the environment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Movement (Gibson)

A

Even when body is still, eyes keep moving

This gives you lots of visual information about positions of objects and surfacesrather than what you would get without movement

Calls the way light structure changes as you move the ambient optic array

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Invariant information (Gibson)

A

Used to gauge distance, depth and orientation of objects

Some features of the ambient optic array invariant and don’t change:

  • Horizon ratio
  • Optic flow patterns
  • Texture gradient
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Texture gradient (Gibson)

A

Elements of object coarse and far apart - close to observer

Elements of object smooth and close together - far from observer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Optic flow patterns (Gibson)

A

Created as elements in the environment pass around us

Gibson thought whole visual field was more important than individual objects

Provided information of speed, direction and altitude to pilots in Gibson’s study

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Horizon ratio (Gibson)

A

Extent of which an object is above horizon compared with extent it is below 2 objects of the same hight on a flat surface will have the same horizon ratio

Doesn’t change with distance from observer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Affordances (Gibson)

A

We automatically know the use of an object when we see it

So a tribesman from a forest theoretically should know how to use a pen from first glance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Main elements of Gibson’s theory of perception

A

Optic array

Movement

Invariant information

Affordances

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

AO2 for Gibson’s theory

A

Gibson and Walk

Hudson (against)

Gibson’s study into WWII pilots

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

AO2 for Gregory’s theory

A

Müller-Lyre illusion

Duck/rabbit illusion

Hudson

Johanson (lights)

Diener (APT/aPt)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Johanson

A

Participants watched film

Man with flashing lights attached to major joints on body in a darkened room

Couldn’t tell what he was until he started moving

Required schema of how people move to tell what the lights were attached to

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Diener

A

Misplaced size constancy

Pair of letters (APt and aPt)

Participants perceived the second ‘P’ as lower-case and smaller

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Main elements of Gregory's theory
Perceptual set Size constancy Hypothesise
26
Gregory's perceptual set
How the influence of expectation affects our perception Made up of: * Previous experience * Context * Motivation * Emotion
27
How schemas affect perception (Gregory)
Schema's vary between individuals Can interpret stimulus different ways because of this
28
How context affects perception (Gregory)
The environment the stimulus is in Same stimulus may be interpreted in different ways in different environment
29
How motivation affects perception (Gregory)
We see what we want to see If we're hungry we may interpret ambiguous stimuli as food
30
How emotion affects perception (Gregory)
Our emotions may affect the way we perceive other's facial expressions or emotions
31
Illusions (Gregory)
These occur because we hypothesise about what we are seeing and these case we get it wrong, or keep changing between 2 equally plausible hypothesise Rabbit/duck Müller-Lyre illusion
32
Size constancy (Gregory)
Familiar objects have a constant size We use this to tell when things get closer or further away as we know they can't change size
33
AO3 of Gregory
Lab work (artificial stimuli) Scientific (can be replicated) Does explain optical illusions (but over-emphasises on making mistakes - very rare occurrence) Nature Deterministic
34
AO3 of Gibson
Gender bias (WWII pilots) Deterministic Reductionist Doesn't explain optical illusions Field work Nature Ethnocentric (Hudson)
35
Müller-Lyre illusion (Culture differences)
Campbell et al Showed illusion to different cultures including America, Africa and Philippines Those brought up in built-up Western societies more susceptible to illusion Led to the carpentered world hypothesis
36
Carpentered world hypothesis
Westerns learn to interpret 2D drawings as 3D objects from early age Leads to misplaced size constancy with Müller-Lyre as they think its's the inside/outside corner of a room Inside is further so appears shorter, outside is closer so appears bigger Those not from Western cultures not brought up like this so not affected
37
Elements of Bruce and Young's model
View centered descriptions Expression independant descriptions Expression analysis Facial speech analysis Directed visual processing Person identity nodes Name generation Cognitive system
38
Pathway for familiar faces name generation (Bruce and Young)
View centered descriptions Expression independant descriptions FRUs PINs Name generation Cognitive system
39
Imagine model for Bruce and Young
Look at pictures for answer
40
Structural encoding
Bruce and Young Constructs various representations and descriptions of faces Made up of view-centred descriptions and expression-independant descriptions
41
Expresion analsysis
Bruce and Young Drawing conclsuions about an individuals emotional state from analysis of facial expressions
42
Facial speech analysis
Bruce and Young Use facial movement (especially lips) to understand speech
43
Directed visual processing
Bruce and Young Specific facial information is processed selectively e.g. whether they have a beard
44
FRUs
Bruce and Young Facial recognition units Stored structural description of familiar faces
45
PINs
Bruce and Young Stored information about known individuals e.g. occupations, interests
46
Name generation
Bruce and Young Names are stored seperately from other information
47
Cognitive system
Bruce and Young Holds additional information which might help with recognition process Deals with things like likelihood of seeing someone in place you are in
48
View-centred descriptions
Part of structural encoding in Bruce and Young Derived from perceptual input
49
Young et al
22 people keeping diaries of everyday errors in person recognition
50
Young et al results
1,008 errors recalled 20% of instances knew a lot about someone, but couldnt recall name No cases of name known with no other information * Supports idea that naming is seperate process People often reported feeling of familiarity but couldn't recall information about person * FRUs activated but not the PINs
51
What is prosopagnosia?
An inability to recognise faces Can recognise a face as a face, but can not link it with other information like their name
52
Supporting research for Bruce and Young's model
Kurucz et al Bruyer et al Campbell et al
53
Kurucz et al
Found prosopagnosia pateints who could identify some familiar faces Unable to recognise facial expressions Supports Bruce and Young's theory of exression analysis running seperate to facial recognition
54
Basics of Bruce and Young model
Face perception is a holisitic process Involves several independant sub-processes working together Found 8 components * These are linked sequentially or parrellel
55
Bruyer et al
Found some prosopagnosia patients couldn't identify any familair faces Could recognise facial expressions Opposite of Kurucz et al's findings Also supports Bruce and Young's theory that expression analysis is independant of facial recognition
56
McGurk and MacDonald
Showed participants the McGrurk illusion Video of someone mouthing "ga" Audio track of someone saying "ba" Participants reported hearing "da"
57
Campbell et al
Used McGurk illusion on 2 prosopagnosia sufferers: D * Couldn't recognise familiar faces, identify facial expressions or judge sex from face * Susceptable to McGurk illusion * Suggests speech analysis is a seperate process T * Was not susceptable to McGurk illusion * Could not lip read but was able to identify facial expressions
58
Bower
Looked at size constancy in infants 9 infants between six and nine weeks Conditioned them to turn heads towards a 30cm cube that was 1m away with a reward of peek-a-boo Made 3 conditions
59
Bower's conditions
**Cube 1** * 30cm cube (same size) * 3m from infant (3X the distance) * Produced retinal image of 1/3 **Cube 2** * 90cm cube (3X bigger) * 3m away (3X bigger) * Produce same retinal image as orginal cube **Cube 3** * 90cm cube (3X bigger) * 1m away (same distance) * Produced retinal image 3X greater than original
60
What Bower's study actually was doing
Conditioned to look a 30cm cube 1m away Cube 2 would give this exact same retinal image However only cube 1 would have same size If infants had size constancy they would look at cube 1 more than the other 2
61
Bower's results
Most head turns towards cube 1 1. 58 head turns 2. 22 head turns 3. 54 head turns
62
Bower's conclusion
Size constancy is innate
63
Slater et al
Supports Bower Found size constancy in infants as young as 2 days old under certain conditions
64
Issues with Bower's study
Infants get bored very easily Infants can't understand instructions