This is a new task for you so I don't expect it to be perfect. I do expect that you do your best. I will give you feedback that you can use to do better in future assignments. Thus you get credit for doing - not qualitatively.
I haven't found a good lateralization experiment online as of yet. So go to http://www.psych.uni.edu/psychexps/Exps/labexperiments.htm and pick a study that interests you and is related to sensation and perception. Participate in the experiment and then report your experiences here.
Please try to adhere to the following format if you can and use the numbering for organization.
1) Brief introduction - As with a research article (remember back to your research methods class) write a brief intro to the experiment. Use terms and terminology for the reader, your text, the online site, and any other information relevant to the experiment. Remember to cite your sources. You don't need a references section, I just want to get an idea of where your information is coming from.
2) Write what you think the hypothesis of the experiment is.
3) Write a method section (again think about what you learned in research methods class).
4) Write a results section (it is OK if it is only descriptive statics from your run).
5) Write a discussion section (include at the end how this relates to sensation & perception).
6) Make a list of the terms and terminology you used in your write up that relate to sensation & perception.
1. For this experiment I chose to do the Visual Reaction Time Experiment. In this experiment I went through three different reaction time tests. The first was a reaction time to a presented color stimulus. The second was a distinction between a blue and red stimulus. The third was just a reaction to the stimulus of red. The dependent variable was time and the between subjects variable was age. The test was not only a reaction time test but a test on cognitive perception. People with a color deficiency or color blindness would have had a hard time distinguishing the colors in the 2nd and 3rd test. Reaction time is another way to measure how fast you can perceive an image or a color. Goldstein says cognitive perception focuses on how perception is affected by the meaning of a stimulus, and by the subjects’ expectations.
2. The hypothesis in the experiment was to determine whether reaction times will differ as a function of the cognitive complexity of the decision (No decision, Go/No Go decision, and Choice decision). No decision reaction times should be the fastest times because there is no cognitive decision to make on identifying the colors. Go/No Go decisions should be longer in reaction times than No decisions because the participant has to perceive the color as red and make the decision to click the button. Choice decisions should be even longer in reaction times than the other two tests because the participant has to perceive the colors identity as red or blue not just a color.
3. The methods used in this study were three different reaction time tests. The first a No decision test was to calculate a baseline for participants. When colors flashed on the screen participants were to click a button. The second Go/No go test was to distinguish reaction time with a decision. Red and blue colors were flashed on the screen at alternating times in no pattern. Participants were then told to click the left button for red and the right button for blue. The third test was a Choice decision test where multiple colors were shown and the participant was to click a button only when they saw red.
4. The results from my experiment concluded that in the simple No decision test my times were fastest in the 200’s. In the Go/No Go test my scores were higher in the 3-400’s. The last test with the Choice decision my scores were highest in the 700’s. This concludes that the
5. I found this experiment very interesting. Not only were the colors perceived be the experimenter but this test proves that reaction time is slowed when people have to make more than one perception at a time. In the simple NO decision test the only thing the participant had to do was click when they saw a stimulus. They didn’t have to put the stimulus in a category. The Go/No Go test took more time because the participant had to categorize the stimulus that was presented as red or blue and click where it was supposed to go. The Choice decision test held the longest reaction times. The participant had to click when they saw red. The participant perceived all the different colors and had to make the choice if it was red or not. Cognitively this decision making took longer therefore the reaction time was longer.
6. Cognitive, perceive, stimulus, dependent variable, between subjects variable, perception, and color blind.
Dichotic Hearing
Introduction
Dichotic hearing is how well an individual can hear out of both ears at the same time. According to the American Psychological Association (APA), much of the research that has been done on dichotic hearing occurred during the 1960's when epilepsy was treated by cutting the copora callosa. Since this method is not permissible for the general public the APA suggests that studying how hearing works and how well your brain interprets messages laterally (2009).
Research Question
It is likely that the researchers are trying to determine how effectively people, in general, can hear and interpret multiple stimuli at once. In short, trying to determine how reliable dichotic hearing is.
Method
The dependent variable for the study is accuracy in labeling sounds played. After informing the participants of how the experiment works, two sounds were played into the subjects' headset simultaneously, one in each ear. After one of six sounds were played, we were then asked to match each sound to the ear played in. (The sounds were Ba, Da, Ga, Ka, Pa, Ta). This occurred for 20 trials.
Results
I was only able to accurately determine sounds to my left ear 46% of the time and sounds to my right ear 60% of the time.
Discussion
Data obtained from me is inconsistent with other data taken and it is hypothesized that I SHOULD be more accurate with my left ear considering the left side of the brain is responsible for verbal skills. This study relates to sensation in perception in the regards that hearing is one of our senses and as human beings we hear multiple things at the same time on a daily basis. It is beneficial for us to know and understand how efficiently we can interpret messages from multiple places at the same time.
Terms:
Perception, Dichotic Hearing, Laterality, Dependent Variable
1.)I chose to do the Pitch Memory Experiment. In Goldstein's sixth edition Sensation and Perception textbook, pitch is defined as a high or low tone, depending on the frequency. Low frequency tones produce a low pitched tone and high pitches are from high frequency tones. If multiple tones are played, does one or a series of tones change your perception of another tone? In this experiment several tones were played and then I was asked to indicate whether the first and last tones played were the same tone or if they were different.
2.)I believe that the hypothesis for this experiment was that people who have had formal training, in either vocal or instrumental music, would have a higher number of tones that they could correctly identify if the first and last tones matched. Also, I think this experiment was attempting to see if left-handed (right brain) people would have an easier time and get more correct than right-handed (left brain) people. Another independent variable being examined is who tends to get more correct answers, males or females.
3.)In this study, first, I was asked a series of questions about myself including gender, if I had had any formal training in either vocal or instumental music and which hand I preferred to write with. I was able to click and hear a sample of what the lowest and highest tones were and then was given two more samples of tones that had the same beginning and ending note and one that had different tones. Then I was played many sets of six different tones, varying in pitch and I was asked if the first and last tones were the same or if they were different
4.) Out of the 50 trials that I did, I missed 7. Of these 7, 6 of the tones that I missed I said that the tones were different, when in actuality they were the same.
5.)I think that my results were fairly good, even though I am right handed and I think that is because I used to be involved in vocal music. I couldn't find any reliable data on whether or not males or females are better at determining pitches or which gender is regarded as more musical, but I think that would be interesting to examine. I think that is would be fascinating to run this experiment with individuals who might be blind to see if they would tend to have less incorrect answers than individuals who are not blind. Also I observed that when the higher pitches played, my cat went crazy, but only for about the two highest pitches. It made me wonder if different cats have different levels to sensitivity, or if as they get older they can't hear as high of frequency pitches like humans do.
6.)Pitch, Perception, Independent Variable, Right/Left Brain,
Introduction
I did the experiment Perception of Gender. This experiment presents faces in which different parts of the face are covered, and then asks the participant to identify the gender. According to the experiment, the study seeks to determine if faces are processed configurally or featurally. In other words, do we just focus on certain features to make decisions of gender, or do we take the entire face in. The temporal lobe is believed to be very active in identifying gender in faces.
Hypothesis
I believe the hypothesis of this experiment is that we use certain perceptual cues on the face to determine gender of people we interact with. I felt during the experiment that the cues I paid the most attention to were chin shape and eyebrow shape.
Methods
There were 3 levels of the facial covering. They were: full view, eyes only, and mouth only. After being shown an image, I was asked to indicate whether I thought the person was male or female. After making a decision, I was then asked to indicate on a sliding scale how confident I was in my decision ranging from not confident at all to very confident. There were 8 female models, and 8 male models in the experiment.
Results
My results showed that when shown the eyes of the person I was correct more often than when just shown the chin. When shown the full image however, I was the most accurate in my guess and showed the most confidence. I was correct in 41 of my guesses out of 48 possible images.
Discussion
I felt my results were probably average. There were a few images I really studied for a long time before making a decision, and even then felt very unsure. I believe that facial recognition of gender is a configural process. Features of the face like the nose or eyes work in relation to other features like the chin and eyebrows, in order to portray a feminine or masculine face. This relates to sensation and perception because we take in certain cues when we view faces. We take those cues and weigh them differently when making our decisions about gender.
Terms: temporal lobe, configural, recognition, feminine cues, masculine cues
1) Introduction: The perception of Gender experiment assesses how accurately one can recognize either a male or a female when different parts of their faces are covered. It was set up by covering up different parts of the face and asking somebody to identify if they were male or female. Many believe that the temporal lobe plays a huge role in identifying what gender the people we see are. The temporal lobe interprets and process auditory stimuli, and plays a role in learning. In essence the study was made to see if people process things configurally or featurally, and whether this is uniformed for everybody, or if it is different for everybody. If we process things configurally, we would be able to correctly identify gender when we see the entire face. If we process things featurally we would be able to identify gender by just seeing certain features of the face, for example, the mouth. This study works to find out if we need to see the entire face in order to identify the correct gender, or can we see just some features and still correctly identify the gender.
2) Hypothesis: When seeing facial features (featurally) and not the entire face (configurally), the gender of the individual can still be correctly observed.
3) Method: The experiment showed 16 images, 8 were male and 8 were female. The pictures of the faces were covered in one of three ways. The first way was full facial view, where you would see the entire face of the individual. The second way was an eye only view; you could only see the individual’s eyes, and the third way a mouth only view of the individual. An image would show up on the screen, and then I was asked to identify the gender of the individual in the image, either male or female. After I identified whether I thought the individual was male or female I was asked to rate how confident I was with my answer I could rate between not confident at all to very confident. There was no time limit to how long you could look at the pictures. The independent variable is the different pictures that were shown. The dependent variable is whether or not I was right when indicating if the picture was male or female. The between subjects variable is whether they showed you a full facial view, a mouth only view, or an eye only view.
4) Results: I identified and showed the most confidence in identifying the gender when I was shown the full face view. When showed a picture of the eyes only view I was correct and more confident more times, than when I was shown the mouth only view.
5) Discussion: I was surprised by the results I got. I figured that it would be easier to identify ones gender if you see the entire face, so that didn’t shock me too much. However, I was shocked at how difficult it was to identify the mouth view only and eyes view only individual’s gender. I figured that I would be able to recognize a “girly” mouth or a “petite” chin, but it wasn’t as easy as I had thought it would be. This relates to sensation and perception, because it deciphers what cues we rely on the most to identify gender and what we perceive to be maleness and femaleness. We rely heavily on clothes and haircuts that people have to identify if they are male or female.
6) Terms: Independent Variable, Dependent Variable, Between Subjects Variable, Temporal lobe, Auditory Stimuli, Configurally, Featurally.
1) Introduction: The Ponzo illusion is a classic illusion presented in the field of sensation and perception. This illusion is also known as The Railroad Track Illusion because the two equal-length horizontal lines are placed over a railroad track that appears to go straight back into the distance. This tricks our mind into believing the top line is actually longer, since it visually appears farther away.
The experiment site offered the opportunity for me to test my own susceptibility to this illusion by adjusting arrows until I perceived them to be of equal length. In this illusion, the top line appears longer because of the depth information that makes it appear farther away (Goldstein, 2007).
2)Hypothesis: Given two equal length horizontal lines, the line on top will appear longer if it is presented with depth information that makes it appear farther away.
3) Methods: In this experiment, the participant is asked to use pointers to adjust the length of a line until it appears to be equal to the length of another line in the display. Ten trials are run, five of each with or without the background "railroad" tracks as visual cues to the participant.
4)Results: As a participant, I proved quite susceptible to the Ponzo illusion. When the railroad tracks were present, I adjusted the lower line an average of 25% longer than the upper line, whereas when the background lines/tracks were absent, I adjusted the lines to be perfectly even, which indicated that the illusion was not due to higher vs. lower positioning, but the background information of the tracks.
5) Discussion: This experiment proved a good illustration of individual differences in regard to sensation and perception. It was surprisingly more difficult for me, than I had anticipated, to overcome the conflicting cues presented by the apparently increased distance used in this illusion. According to Wikipedia, people in non-western cultures, or in rural areas, are less susceptible to the Ponzo illusion. Perhaps my own perception is more affected due to the fact that I grew up in the city.
6) Terms: Conflicting Cues Theory, depth information, misapplied scaling.
1)This experiment was about visual reaction time. It looked at how fast reaction time was to certain colors. The experiment would show colors and you would have to press a key on your computer as fast as you saw the color. Another part of the experiment would see your reaction to a certain color, if you saw the color red then you would press a button, otherwise you wouldn’t press anything. The third part to the experiment is pressing a certain button with one color and a certain button with another color. This experiment looked at how fast your eyes could see a picture and have your brain analyze it. The dependent variable was time in this experiment.
2)Reaction time differs with different stimuli and how complex the decision is.
3)The experiment had three different parts. The first part was a simple reaction time to a stimulus, the second part is responding to only a certain stimuli while disregarding the other part; this is called the Go/No go part of the experiment, and the third is reacting differently to two different stimuli; this is the Choice part of the experiment.
4)The numbers that the experiment gave me were decimals so I’m assuming they are recorded in seconds. I took the numbers and made them into an average score for the three parts of the experiment. .3408 was my average score for the Choice part. .3785 was my average score for the Go/No go part. 1.402 was my average for the Simple category. It was a little higher because one score was 12.29. I remember taking a long time on one because I got distracted. This makes the number a major outlier for the experiment.
5)This experiment relates to Sensation and Perception because it is about the eye seeing an image and interpreting it for your brain to understand. It shows how fast your eyes can relay the image to your brain and how fast your brain can process it. This experiment involves the retina sending the image to the optic nerve which sends the image to the brain to interpret it (Goldstein, 1996).
6)Terms: Retina, optic nerve, dependent variable, visual, outlier.
Linearization scoop experiment
The linearization experiment hypothesis is there a significant difference between in how we see and interrupt what we see. The independent variable is the ability to change the participant(s) train of thought by using a stimulus such as words text that is filled with different colors then what the color text really perceives, and the reaction time of what appearance or area of the screen the text signifies left, middle or right as it flashes. Example while taking the experiment I notice that the four colors and four numbers that connected to the numbers such as red (2), blue (4), green (6), and yellow (8).
The reaction time differs to different text or colors which are being flashed. I was unable to get the scores for the experiment, but I did get the pretest scores. The number of correct responses is 16, the mean of the reaction time is 1.18 sec, and the maximum reaction time is 2.09 sec.
The way the experiment relates to sensation and perception is the sensitivity to light in the rods and to the cones. The use of apartment movement as the text or color moves in one area to and another area of the screen while taking the experiment. The response to retinal points as they flash either from the left, the middle or the right of the screen, and in a sense it falls into the muller-lyer illusion in how it is lined up. As well as the movement of the muscle of the eyes are used and the occipital lobe, and either the side of the brain is functioning or being used in the motor and sensory skills.
Terms: retina, eye, color visual response, fixed vision, actual movement, aperture, motor signal, perceiving movement. (Goldstein 2007)
1) The Perception of Gender Experiment showed pictures of people who wore fabric over certain parts of the face. You were then asked to determine if the person was a male or female base don the facial features you were shown. You then rated your decision on how confident you were in your answer. The 3 views shown were full view, eyes only, and mouth only. We recognize and interpret objects based on either a single feature (a featural process) or based on the relation between features (a configural process). It is said that face perception is often described as a configural process, and it is possible that the processing of gender in faces is a configural process rather than a featural process because it appears that the eye in relation to the brow is effective information; whereas one feature alone, such as length of the nose, is not as effective for suggesting gender.
2) We are able to identify a persons gender based on a featural process and/or a configural process.
3) This is a 3x3x2 design; the independent variables are view of face (3 levels: full, eyes only, mouth only) and gender of face (2 levels: male, female). There are 8 male models and 8 female models and they were photographed in each condition. Participants will judge each face in each condition once, resulting in a total of 48 trials. The dependent variables are number of correct responses and level of confidence.
4) Based on my trial run, it was determined I had the most confidence in my decision of identifying the gender when I was shown the full face view. When shown a picture of the eyes only view, I was correct on more identifications, than mouth only view.
5) I expected the results I got after viewing the pictures. It was easier to identify the full face view gender, in which my results interpreted I did as well. It was very hard when it came to the eyes only and mouth only view. The first couple photos were okay. But as you went on, it seemed to get harder because you would second guess yourself. It was easy to get mixed up based on your prediction of a girl mouth/eyes and a male mouth/eyes from previous experiences. This relates to sensation and perception because it determines what cues we rely on the most to identify gender and what we perceive to be a certain gender. Our environment influences our decision on interpreting facial features (friends and family, clothing, accessories, etc.)
6) Cue, independent variable, dependent variable, bias, featural process, configural process.
1)Intro: The experiment I chose to participate in was the Mental Rotation test. For this experiment I was required to look at the two shapes presented and then choose if the two shapes are the same or if they are different. The shape on the left was compared to the shape on the right but, the shape on the right would be rotated a degree amount to make the test difficult. After I hit the desired button on the screen, my response time and degree rotation would be presented along with correct total and incorrect total. The total number of trials was 48.
2) Hypothesis: I believe the hypothesis was the effect of an individuals spatial ability on reaction time.
3)Methods: In this experiment, participants were asked to sit at a computer and identify if 3D shapes are the same or different. Shapes on the left side of the screen would be compared to rotated shapes on the right side of the screen. After the participant has decided if the shape is alike or different, than reaction time, degree rotation and total number of correct and incorrect would be presented. A total of 48 paired shapes will be presented upon completion the participant will be done with the experiment.
4)Results: After comparing the 48 pairs of shapes I came up with a total of 31 shapes correctly identified and 17 incorrect identified. The incorrect trial’s reaction times were 3+sec for 10 of the 17 and around 2sec for the other seven. On correct trials I had (1sec-5, 2sec-16, 3sec-7, 4+sec-3).
5)Discussion: This mental rotation experiment was a good test of spatial skills for college age students. Upon reflecting my data I noticed that incorrect answers averaged around the +3sec range. On conclusion might be that incorrect responses may be attributed to over thinking the comparisons of the shapes. Upon reflection of the correct answers I noticed that the average of 2sec may be ideal for identification of spatial shapes. Since the majority of correct answers fell around 2sec, and incorrect answers fell around 3sec one conclusion may be that correct spatial identification might be 2sec, but when reaction time is 3sec or +3sec than incorrect reaction time may occur.
1)Intro: The experiment I participated in was the Stroop Test. In this experiment, Colors were presented in words and the type was also colored. Some were the same (the word red was colored red) and some were different (the word red was colored blue). During the experiment, I had to identify a color as the color it appeared and not as what was spelled out. For example, if the word blue appeared and it was colored yellow, I was to identify the color yellow. This was done using corresponding numbers for the colors and reaction time was measured. Also, the placement of the colored words changed. They were either on the left, the right, or centered.
2)Hypothesis: I believe the hypothesis was that reaction time is effected by congruency of colored words to the actual colors and placement of the colored words.
3)Methods: For this experiment, reaction time was measured for congruent colors (word matches color), non-congruent colors, and position. Correctness was also measured. This was done using 74 tests. In these tests, a colored word (words are colors spelled out) was flashed on the left, right, or center of the screen. The goal of the participant is to identify the color displayed (not the word) with a corresponding number. This was to be done as quickly as possible without error.
4)Results: I got 72 out of 74 correct. For congruent colors, my average reaction time for placement on the left was .57 seconds, the center was .48, and the right was .53. For non-congruent colors, my average reaction time for placement on the left was .61, the center was .57, and the right was .66. I was faster with congruent colors and fastest for center placement.
5)Discussion: I'm uncertain about my results because I don't know how others typically score but I do not feel like I did poorly. I was disappointed in my incorrect answers. It was frustrating because I knew right away when I made a mistake. One mistake was on a non-congruent color and I identified the word instead of the color. The other mistake happened when my finger got ahead of me and just hit a random number. I choose this experiment because I felt I already knew about the Stroop Test and wanted to try it out. I think my results are probably typical in that the congruent colors in the center were the ones I identified the fastest. I could have guessed the results but they were interesting and I have a big urge to do the experiment again to see if I can improve.
This experiment relates to the class because it has to do with your perception of colors and if you're able to rapidly distinguish the color of the non-congruent colored words. There was practice before the actual experiment and I think it is necessary. It is difficult to just look at the color of a word and not focus on the spelled out color. Once I read the word my hand wanted to press the corresponding number even though I saw that the color of the word was different. After realizing this in practice, I tried my best to ignore the word and focus on the color. This was easiest done by not directly focusing my sight on the word but glancing at the color of the word.
Terms: congruent, non-congruent, Stroop Test, reaction time, sight, perception, color
1. I chose to participate the Pitch Memory Experiment. According to Wolfe sensation and perception textbook, pitch is defined as the psychological aspect of sound related to the fundamental frequency. In looking at that definition frequency has to be understood in order to understand the meaning of pitch. This is the of times per second that changes patterns of different pressures change or repeat. Sound waves also an impact on pitch memory in which are different pressure change throughout sound. Lower frequency sound correspond to low frequency pitches in which the same applies to higher frequency sounds corresponding with high frequency pitches. In this experiment, they provide you with several pitches and you are require to indicate if the first pitch played was the same or different pitch than the last one of the sequence.
2. I believe that the hypothesis in this experiment was people who have had formal training in vocal or instrumental music would have a better pitch memory than someone who had no formal training at all. Another hypothesis that might be implemented would be the more years you've had training in these areas the higher your score will be.
3. Before this study I was asked some questions in regards to the experiment. They asked me what gender i was. If I had any formal training in vocal or instrumental music and which hand I preferred to write with. They provided me with a sample of what the lowest and highest tones were I would be listening to during the experiment. Also in providing that information there were the pitches and the frequency in which I would be hearing as well. In beginning the assessment, They played a serious of pitches that were presented in a cluster for which I had to determine if the first and last pitch were in fact the same or different. These pitches weren't alined to construct a melody or harmony. They were randomized for analyzing. There about about 76 trails I analyzed in which they randomized the pitches for each trial. Each trial had six pitches in it.
4. Out of 76 trials I received 74 correct. For the two trails that were incorrect, one of them I believed the pitch was the same as the first and the other one I thought the first pitch was different than the last. Im not sure about the group results for this experiment but Im guessing that their hypothesis was in fact true.
5. I believe my results were ranked in the higher percentile of scores. This was mainly because I have had about 15-17 years of training in instrumental and vocal training. Im not sure what hand I wrote with or my gender had to do with memorizing pitches. Formal training in music would help a person with various ear training techniques especially training that has to do with improvisation. It shows how to tell the various intervals the pitches were given at also showing how to memorize pitches to form relative or perfect pitch. Im not sure that there is any data that supports that pitch memory is contingent on gender or that has to do with the hand you right with. This experiment has a few things to do with sensation and perception. This shows the affects of your auditory functions which displays the use of one of your senses. Also this displays the stimulus aspect of sensation. The perception aspect would be perceiving the various pitches to be higher, lower, the same, and different. This has to do with the interpretation aspect of perception. It would be intriguing to test people who are blind and people who are able to see. You would test and see if blind people have a higher, lower or the same sense of hearing than that of a person with sight. Another thing you could test is the enviornmental facts of both control groups to see if that has an impact on pitch memory. I liked this experiment because it forced me to actually turn on my listening ears really tight. The difficult part about this experiment was when the pitches were played sometimes they would display the same pitch in different octaves which would be harder for someone to interpret the same or different if they weren't familiar with music. An octave is where the note can be the same but higher or lower.
high/low Frequency, sound wave, pitch, relative/ perfect pitch, interval, octave, cluster, improvisation
1)I chose to do the Reaction Time Experiment for Color. The premises of this experiment is based on three choices. Simple Reactions - this involves pressing any key as fast as possible after seeing a signal stimulus. Go/NoGo choices - which implore the experimentee to only discriminate the color red by pressing any key. Lastly, there is Choice Reaction where you're asked to press "" for blue. The variable being measure here is that of time, and how each decision will affect it.
2) The purpose of this experiment is to test which decision (Simple,Go/NoGo,Choice Reaction) will affect the thinking process the most. Simple choice tests will score the quickest, seeing as how less thinking needs to occur to press any key at a stimulus. Go/NoGo should be slightly longer than No decisions since one has to identify a specific color. Likewise, Choice Reaction tests should take the longest. The user must identify the color, and then press the corresponding arrow. The times from fastest to slowest will proceed as following; Simple, NoGo, Choice Reaction.
3) Three tests were used in this experiment. First, (in my case) NoGo was tested. The user must decide if the color on the screen is red and press any key. Secondly, Simple No will ask the user to press any key at the sign of any stimuli. Third, Choice Reaction is tested. This asks the user to press the corresponding arrows for corresponding colors.
4) The results were as the hypothesis stated. Simple test ranges hovered around 200. NoGo tests varied from 300-400, and Choice tests ranged from 600+.
5) The experimenter proves that the level of cognitive process can affect cognitive decision making. The more complex the thought process, the higher the reaction times went. This proves the hypothesis. We can relate this to Sensation and Perception in many ways. Experimenters could conduct further testing and see how different colors also affect reaction time, if at all. We see how the eye and brain co-exist with one another to relay and interpret signals at a constant rate.
6)Dependent variable, hypothesis, cognitive proccess, cognitive decision making
1) Introduction
Illusions are a nonveridical perception that we experience when the perception that matches the actual physical situation breaks down due to the inaccurate information received (Goldstein, 2002). In the Muller-Lyer illusion, one vertical line appears to be longer that the other although the two lines are the exact same length. In the textbook, the conflicting cues theory attempts to explain this illusion stating that our perception of length of the lines depends on 2 cues for length; one is the actual length of the vertical lines, and the other one is the overall length of the figure. To understand this phenomenon, this experiment studies fin angle as a variable in length discrimination.
2) Hypothesis
The research hypothesis for this experiment (I think) it is that there is a significant relation between the angle of the fin and the length discrepancy or error.
3) Method
In this experiment, participants are shown a number of figures consisting of two similar vertical lines and their task is to resize the line on the left to match the length of the one on the right. The figures also differ in the angle of the fins, which could be acute or obtuse. The fin angles were multiples of 15 and ranged from 15 degrees to 165 degrees. This process requires individuals to move the pointer on the screen to adjust the length of the lines and click matches when the lines seem to be the same length. The experiment takes about 5 minutes to complete and consists of 4 trials each of 11 different fin angles randomly presented.
4) Results
My results for this experiment show that the 15 degrees angle had the least amount of error (M= 1.00), and the 165 angle had the most (M= 16.75). A Pearson correlation analysis shows that there is a significant relation of -.791 between the angle of the fin and the amount of error and therefore, we can reject the null hypothesis.
5) Discussion
I think the relation between variables is very interesting. The fin angles with the most amount of error were the angles of 105 degrees and higher (M= -8.85). On the other hand, the fin angles with the least amount of error were the angles of 75 degrees and lower (M= 2.7). Additionally, these two groups of angles are also related to the total length of the figure. The angles equal or higher than 105 degrees don’t change this length, in comparison to the angles equal or lower than 75 degrees which increase the total size of the figure. In relation to sensation and perception, the reader discusses that there are cells in the V1 area of the brain that are excited by lines depending on the line’s position and orientation which are called hypercomplex cells. These cells respond to oriented lines stimuli and also their length; for example, if a line is too long the hypercomplex cell reduces its rate of spiking. If the perception of the Mueller-Lyer illusion depends on the vertical length of the line and the overall length of the figure, further research could be aimed to study the same variable (fin’s angles) recording neurons’ electric signals as a response to the two different groups of angles.
6) Terms
Muller-Lyer illusion, conflicting cues theory , V1 area , hypercomplex cells, neurons’ electric signals