1
Q
the brain assumes that ____ objects are grouped
A
like
2
Q
pareidolia
A
- we interpret vague stimuli as something familiar
- face pareidolia is most common (we see faces everywhere)
3
Q
face on mars
A
- a face looking thing on mars
- many conspiracies began
- they looked at the face further, and ultimately it was just a mountain that looked like a face
4
Q
big events are expected to have…
A
- big causal explanations
- why there were conspiracies abt the face on mars
5
Q
- president of kumar is targeted in an assasination
- participants asked if he fully recovered or if he dies from injuries
- then asked w cause of death, results?
A
- if he died: participants said it was likely a government conspiracy
- if he survived: participants said it was likely a lone gunman
6
Q
flashed face distortion effect
A
- flashing faces on two sides of a cross, and faces begin to distort
- no full explanation why it happens
- perhaps that if one face has a difference, when we compare it, that feature is exaggerated
7
Q
two strategies for face processing
A
- configural
- featural
8
Q
composite face effect
A
- hard to ignore face when it is connected
- telling participants to decide if top halves of face are same or diff, but each face has attached to a diff bottom part
- hard to do
9
Q
are we faster at processing faces upside down or objects?
A
- objects
- we are less able to process upside faces
10
Q
the thatcher illusion
A
- flipped features of face and it doesn’t look too bad upside down
- looks much worse right side up w/ upside down features
- bc we don’t process upside faces as badly upside down
- proof for configural theory
11
Q
the hollow face illusion: charlie chaplin mask flips. the backside of it doesn’t look hollow, but inside out. why?
A
- form perception
- brain has two hypotheses: faces are concave and faces are convex
- we KNOW faces are convex bc of prior experiences bc we never see concave faces
- so, we assume the concave face is actually convex, even though it isn’t
12
Q
what does lie detection break down into? (four categories)
A
- hit: lying, believed lying
- false alarm: not lying, believe lying
- miss: lying, didn’t believe lying
- correct rejection: not lying, didn’t believe lying
13
Q
what did the gestalt principles of perception/philosophy challenge and how?
A
- the structuralist approach: reduce perception to its basic elements by examining oneself w/ introspection (sensations, views, feelings, emotions)
- the gestalt DISAGREED w/ this
- new approach of kafka: “the whole is other than the sum of its parts”
- i.e. we could watch each individual frame of a movie but it’ll never be as good as watching the whole movie
14
Q
gestalt principles
A
- laws that describe how we organize visual input
- they proposed laws of organization/grouping tendencies that describe how we group visual input
- believe they are innate/acquired quickly after birth
15
Q
what is the most fundamental gestalt principle?
A
figure-ground segregation
16
Q
the snowman example
A
- small enclosed region surrounded by a larger region
- figure tends to have distinct borders/edges and is perceived as being in the front of the background
17
Q
our ability to segregate figure from the background is…
A
- an automated process
- guided by cues
- influenced by prior experiences, biases, and heuristics
18
Q
what are the gestalt principles? (6)
A
- figure-ground: ability to distinguish an object from its background in a visual scene
- proximity: tendency to group together elements that are close together in space
- closure: the tendency to fill in gaps in a contour to perceive a whole object
- similiarity: the tendency to group together elements that are physically similar
- continuity: ability to perceive a simple, continuous form rather than a combination of awkward forms
- common fate: the tendency to group together elements that change in the same way
19
Q
what do we typically see as one group and why?
A
- regions of high density as one group
- due to proximity
- we group together objects that are close together than further apart
20
Q
example of gestalt principle similarity
A
- rows of corn and sunflower
- we group sunflowers all together even though are are equal in proximity to the corn
21
Q
examples of continuity
A
- we see the letter X as two continuous lines, not two Vs
- in a vase of flowers, we perceive each stem as a continuous line even though the stems r likely crisscrossed
22
Q
example of common fate
A
- fish moving in same direction = we group them together bc. same direction
- we can see camouflaged moth against a tree when it moves, but not when it’s still bc of the moth has one direction so we can perceive its contour
23
Q
ability to create signal of pattern recognition is causes by these two things:
A
bottom up and top down processing
24
Q
bottom up processing
A
- object recognition is guided by the features that are in the stimulus
- i.e. we recognize a cow bc we can see its individual traits
25
top down processing
- object recognition is guided by our own beliefs or expectations
26
what is an experiment for top down processing?
- priming
- experimenter measures how fast a participant can read aloud a word on screen
- if participant is told next word is a type of animal, animal words are said faster than non-animal words
- thus, processing of words is more efficient is participant is primed beforehand to expect a certain category
27
can top-down processing work alone?
- no
- it needs some input from the stimulus BEFORE our expectations can influence our recognition of it
28
bidirectional activation
- processing occurs in both directions at once
- we’re influenced by object features and expectation simultaneously
29
geon theory
- we have 36 different geons (simple geometric forms) stored in memory
- why these, we can recognize over 150 million different objects
30
problems with geon theory
- for some complex stimuli, its difficult to determine which geons would be used (like crumpled paper)
- in some brain injuries, they can differentiate btwn tools but not fruit: hard to explain w/ geon theory
31
how could geon theory be modified to explain brain damage?
geons could be processed at a different level of neural signaling separate from the area of brain damage
32
template theory
- we store many different templates in memory
- when we come across an object, we compare the object to all our other templates
- familiar objects can be named by activated connection areas to language areas in brain
- unfamiliar is stored in memory as a new template
33
difference btwn template theory and exemplar theory
- template theory requires an EXACT match
- exemplar theory doesn’t require an exact match
34
why is template theory not realistic?
- we would have to store a lot of templates in memory to recognize all objects
- even diff facial expressions in people
35
what theory overcomes the template theory?
prototype theory
36
prototype theory
- we store the most typical/ideal example of an object in our memory
- more flexible, don’t need an exact match
- explains how we can easily recognize objects we haven’t seen before (like a stranger’s dog)
- we ALSO have more than one type of representation for each object, like for our favourite dogs
37
neural processing of object information is done in parallel
- diff brain systems process diff components of visual signal simultaneously
- we are better at doing recognizing and categorizing objects than computers
38
can any theory give a complete explanation as to how we categorize objects?
no
39
perceptual constancy
- our ability to perceive an object as unchanging even if the visual image produced by the object is constantly changing
- i.e. see dog across park, even if its smaller now, our perceptual system automatically factors in distance
40
types of perceptual constancies
- shape constancy: an object is perceived to have a constant shape despite the shape of its retinal image changing with shifts in point of view or change in object position
- location constancy: an object is perceived to be stationary despite changing location on our retina due to body movements
- size constancy: an object is perceived to be the same size despite the size of its retinal image varying w/ distance
- brightness constancy: an object is perceived to be the same brightness despite reflecting more/less light onto our retina
- colour constancy: an object is perceived to have a constant colour despite different illumination conditions
41
example of shape constancy
- a door
- it is rectangular
- but diff. shapes when in diff. angles of open
- we still perceive it as having a constant rectangular shape
42
example of location constancy
- in car
- things outside are moving in our retina but we perceive them as stationary
43
example of size constancy
- when a friend walks away from us
- we know that they aren’t shrinking
- instead, we perceive depth
44
example of brightness constancy
- we perceive a coffee mug to be the same brightness regardless of if the room is in high or low illumination
- black/white still look black/white regardless of environmental illumination
45
do black or white objects reflect more light outside/inside?
- black objects outside reflect more light than white object inside
- but we still perceive black as black and white as white
46
example of colour constancy
- if a white dog was outside under red lighting
- we still recognize it as a white dog as long as a range of other colours are available in the background for reference
47
how do we account for perceptual constancies
- we know that most objects don’t change
- we also pick up cues in rest of scene
- our brain integrates motion of all elements in a scene
48
what is the muller-lyer illusion explained by? (two arrows)
- misapplication of size constancy
- misinterpretation of depth
- on a wall corner approaching us: it looks longer w/ two Vs going away = closer to us
- on a wall corner way from us: it looks shorter w two Vs coming towards us = further to us
49
who is less susceptible to the muller-lyer illusion
- ppl from cultures who live in round huts
- those who aren’t surrounded by right angles
50
the ames room
- a room that appears rectangular but is actually trapezoidal
- one side is further from us, but we assume that its a normal rectangular room
- distance has been manipulating, leading us to incorrectly interpret size (size constancy implicated)
51
the ponzo illusion
- manipulation of depth cues to trick size constancy
- on a “road” two lines of shape length placed
- we assume the one “further” is longer even tho they r same
- bc we expect further things to look shorter
psych 1xx3
flashcards
Decks in class (17)
# Cards
