Please read chapter 1 (if you don't have a book yet, please let me know). After reading chapter 1, please respond to the following questions:
What were three things from the chapter that you found interesting? Why were they interesting to you? Which one thing did you find the least interesting? Why? What did you read in the chapter that you think will be most useful to in understanding Sensation & Perception? Finally indicate two topics or concepts that you would like more information about.
Note:
Keep in mind that there are no scheduled exams. When you make you posts make sure they are of sufficient caliber that the could be used as notes in a test - since the posts are what we are doing in lieu of an exam. Be sure to use the terms and
terminology in your posts.
Once you are done with your post make list of the terms and terminology you used in your post.
I found the signal detection theory to be interesting. This is the concept that your awareness that something may happen may make you more sensitive to false alarms. There is a certain threshold for stimuli, and depending on your threshold you detection can vary. There are four potential outcomes. You may have a correct rejection (no ring when there is no ring), a hit (detect a ring when there is a ring), or a false alarm (detect a ring when there is a ring). I think it is interesting that we can change our sensitivity to stimuli. The receiver operating characteristic curve graphs the hit rate, or the number of times a person awaiting stimuli will correctly detect the stimuli. This basically explains why sometimes when you are anxious about a certain stimuli, your mind sometimes plays tricks on you and you encounter more false alarms.
I think that the concept of polysnsory is very interesting. It is the blending of multiple sensory systems. The book did not go into detail about this concept, but if I were to guess this is probably used a lot by humans in every day life. For example, right now I am getting information through sight by looking at my computer screen. I am touching my computer keys, and different letters are coming up depending on which key I touch. Then, through sight I am detecting if I am putting the letters together correctly.
I found empiricalism and nativism to be interesting. Nativism is the idea that the mind produces ideas that are derived from external sources and that we have abilities that are innate and not learned. This is essentially saying that nature gives you these qualities and they are not learned over time. Empiricalism says that an individual’s environment lets them learn these qualities. Empiricist is the idea that experience from the senses is the only source of knowledge. I think this is an age old but still interesting and relevant debate especially when you are relating it to sensation and perception.
I thought most of the chapter was interesting. I thought at times they went into too much detail about the history of the person they were talking about. I think sometimes more content and less of that is more productive. Otherwise I can’t really think of anything I found “uninteresting.”
I think the thing in this chapter that will prove to be the most useful in understanding sensation and perception is the biology of perception. This is how the senses are communicated to us through the brain. Also the way that our neurons fire.
I would like to learn more about the biology of perception in the classroom and also the way that neurons communicate with each other.
Signal Detection theory, Correct rejection, hit, false alarm, receiver operating characteristic, polysensory, empiricalism, nativism, biology of perception, nerons,
Definitely foundational concepts you mentioned. SDT is used in a lot of different types of research. The biology of perception is important because you get the building blocks of perception and what ultimately gives rise to our conscious awareness and experiences with the external world.
1) After reading chapter one, I found many things interesting but there were a few particular things I really enjoyed reading about. (1)I thought Panpsychism, a concept proposed by Gustav Fechner, was interesting because it proposes that mind exists as a property of all matter, not only in animals but applying to inanimate objects, as well. Fechner stated that the mind or consciousness is present in all of nature, after becoming absorbed with the relationship between mind and matter. I thought it was interesting that Fechner believed that a consciousness could be present in inanimate objects. I never thought of the terms mind and matter, as synonyms for ‘sensation’ and ‘energy.’
(2) The second concept I found especially interesting from the reading were thresholds. I have learned about thresholds in other psychology courses, but it was nice to see them discussed from a slightly different perspective. Ernst Weber tested human accuracy of detecting touch with a compass-like device. Weber could determine the smallest distance between two points that a person could recognize as two points instead of one, called the two-point threshold. But for Fechner and I, the more interesting portion of Weber’s tests were the lifted weights tests. I enjoyed the findings of this test, because I learned that subjects’ ability to detect the difference between the standard and the comparison weights depended on the standard weight. If the standard was light, the people were better at detecting small differences. In contrast, when the standard was heavier, people needed bigger differences before they could tell a change in the weights. The difference needed for detecting a change in weight is called the just noticeable difference. The smallest change in a stimulus that can be detected is the difference threshold. This relationship is now referred to as “Weber’s Law.”
(3) The third concept I found interesting was vitalism. Vitalism is the idea that there is a force in life that is distinct from physical entities. This idea fit well with dualism and panpsychism. Hermann von Helmholtz thought that all behavior should be explained by only physical forces, and vitalism violated the physical law of conservation of energy. I was interested in this concept originally because Helmholtz became interested in an idea that opposed what he believed, something that I do often, so he set out to prove that what he believed was correct. As a result, he began studying vision, and even invented the ophthalmoscope.
2) One concept from the chapter that I found least interesting was neurotransmitters. I know that these molecules are vital parts of the brain, and can be influenced by drugs, but I am just not that interested in them. I understand that neurotransmitters are the molecules that travel from the axon across the synapse to the dendrite of the next neuron, and that there are many different kinds in the brain, but this information isn’t that appealing to me, and I don’t particularly enjoy learning about this stuff.
3) I think the concept of psychophysics will be the most useful to me in studying sensation and perception, because it encapsulates the idea of a relationship between mind (sensation) and the energy (matter) that gave rise to the sensation. This relationship appears to be a building block that later studies of sensation and perception were founded upon. Currently, I think that the way our minds interpret stimuli is the foundation for this course.
4) Since I found thresholds and psychophysics interesting in the chapter, I would like to learn more about those concepts which I’m sure we’ll discuss thoroughly in class. I enjoyed learning about the weight difference test by Weber, and would like to learn a little more about that. I also think that psychophysics are important for the study of sensation and perception, so I hope we discuss that topic more in depth, because I don’t think the book had enough information about it.
Terms used: panpsychism, sensation, thresholds, two-point threshold, just noticeable difference (JND), difference threshold, Weber’s Law, vitalism, psychophysics, neurotransmitters, neurons, molecules, axon, synapse, dendrite, stimuli
The psychophysics stuff is still used a lot in research today. You have to know where thresholds are at for various continua of stimuli to answer important questions about how people perceive those stimuli. The absolute threshold stuff is interesting as well because it makes you aware that there is a vast amount of physical energy out in the world and we are only privy to a small portion of certain sub-regions of that continuum of energy.
First of all I am now interested in rewatching the Matrix, I hope its on Netflix!
1. Three things that I found interesting from the chapter.
-Having done the experiment that you sent us, which was very long, I found the JND or Just Noticable Difference information interesting. What I liked most was the description of the weight experiments done by Weber. I noticed when I recieved my scores that I did really well when the lines were small but as they got bigger I did worse and worse. This is similar to the weights.
-Signal Detection Theory-AWESOME. I liked reading about this because of two reasons; one being that this happens to me quite often. I will be excited or nervous about getting a call and think that I hear my phone ring and it is so frustrating when it did not really ring. The second reason is because I was reading a students blog from this class from a different semester about how phone vibrations can be decieving. Your body is so amped up thinking that you might get positive reinforcement from your cell phone that every small movement can be percieved as a vibration from your phone. The graphs were really helpful for that section in the reading, thank you stats!
-I also enjoyed that information about the giant squid neurons. I liked this part because as a believer in God and my belief that God planned certian things as science maybe he gave us these giant squids so that we could better our knowledge about the nervous system, giving us the ability to figure out that neural firing is electrochemical and happens in 1/1,000 of a second that is really fascinating stuff.
2. One thing I found uninteresting. In all most all of my psych courses we learn about the mind body problem. I realize that these concepts and ideas are extremely important to the history of our science but I really do not think that a real true answer will ever be found and if scientifically a true answer about whether our mind is a real separate entity is truely ever discovered that does not mean that anyone will even believe that scientist. Therefore I do not like having to learn about it over and over again. I did like how the text book glued those concepts to perception so that I wasn't as bored.
3. Most useful in understanding sensation and perception: At the begining of the chapter the book discussed a very simple fact, the brain adapts to everything that is still because it is unlikely that those still objects will become dangerous while the brain concentraits heavily on things that move and quickly engage our sensory systems. I like this simple definition and feel that many experiments and theories will be able to relate back to that so that I can further build my knowledge on this topic.
4. Two topics I would like more information about( I will actually list three): Were you named after Otto Loewi?, I would like to have the biology of perception further explained because I have trouble comprhending that stuff on my own, and polysensory. While the broad definition of polysensory makes sense I would like to know more.
Just noticable difference (JND), Weber, Signal Detection theory, adapt, neurons, nervous system, neural firing, electrochemical, mind body problem, Otto Loewi, biology of perception, and polysensory
Phantom phone vibration happens all too often. I don't know if it is just based on our expectation of constantly being bombarded with information/communication or if we actually experience a false alarm (probably an interaction present here). Your perspective on the giant squid is interesting. Hodgkin and Huxley really found a truly great model organism, meaning simple enough (and big enough) to study a complex neurobiological function. Definately a few other model organisms out there (Aplysia Californica was Kandel's organism of choice to learn about LTP and other principles of synaptic transmission).
The mind body problem, while some people find it uninteresting, is a key philosophical concept because people studying or thinking about the mind used to think that the mind and body were two separate things. But of course now we know, in adherence to a monistic view, that the mind emerges from the processes carried out by the brain. The experiences we have and the thoughts we view ourselves as possessing are tied to underlying neural correlates housed in the tissue that is the brain.
Plato’s Cave scenario, I remember it from my philosophy class during my time at community college. At the time I wasn’t all that interested and didn’t think I would need to remember such information. So to run by this scenario once more in my psychology class, and the class being Sensation and Perception was interesting. It caught my attention a bit more this time around and how it related not to just this class but also to hear that the Matrix was influenced by it, which makes it an interesting topic to further investigate. Adaptation was another thing I found interesting, I’ve always been aware of it and heard it mentioned, never actually got a full understanding of it. Adaption means a reduction in response caused by prior or continuing stimulation. I’ve never realized that the act of adapting was actually in fact a reduction in response, rather than adapting in its entirety. That’s what I get for never fully understanding a definition and what it implies, which sort of makes it the least interesting of the three things I chose. The third thing of interest I found in chapter one was the topic of vitalism, it’s something I hadn’t heard of before and its definition sort of caught my attention. Vitalism is the idea that there is a force in life that is distinct from physical entities. It was a different point of few that was in-between the differing views at the time, and I found it interesting and perhaps that will be my choice of topic to do a little research on.
The most useful topic in this chapter I believe is more so the section about the brain and the differing senses that allow us to sense what we need to. Olfactory, the sense of smell; optic nerves; the sense of sight; auditory, the ability to hear…all of these are important pieces in the puzzle that is sensation and perception at least in the beginning. Knowing these things and how they help us with the acts outside ourselves I find to be important as well as useful.
Terms: Plato, adaptation, vitalism, olfactory, optic nerve, auditory, sensation and perception
The allegory of the cave really makes you think. The philosophical background is boring to some people, but you clearly see how it makes an impact as a foundation for learning and thinking about the principles of sensation and perception.
1.) Three things I really enjoyed about this chapter were Nativism, Empiricism, and Just noticeable difference.
As the book describes it, Nativism is the idea that the mind produces ideas that are not derived from external sources, and that we have abilities that are innate and not learned. What that is basically saying is that the mind and body are separate. What I like about Nativism was that it says the mind has no physical boundaries. It seems in the Nativism world there are two types of people, Dualist and monist. Dualism is when both the mind and body exist and Monism is the idea that mind and matter are formed from the same thing. I find these views interesting just because as a psychology major I’ve covered them many times.
Another thing I found interesting in this chapter was Empiricism. Empiricism is experience from one’s senses is the only source of knowledge. One thing that always interested me was John Locke’s Tabula Rasa, which means blank slate. Our experiences of the world around us form us to be who we are today. In my history and Systems Class we talked about Molyneux’s Problem which stated if someone who was blind and touched things their whole life were to gain vision, would they be able to tell the difference between the things they used to touch by just their sight. Locke’s response was that they would not be able to perceive which was which without touching them first. I found that problem to be very interesting and it would be cool to see that experiment to unfold.
Just noticeable difference was another topic that caught my interest in this chapter. JND is the smallest difference between two stimuli that enables it to be correctly judged as different. It thought it was well put when the book explained the that a 1 gram difference in weight is noticeable in something that weighs only 40 grams but it would be very unnoticeable in an object that weighed 400 grams. This can be applied not only to weight but all of our senses (differences in light, sound, temperature, etc).
2.) Something that I didn’t really like in this chapter was the tables in Signal detection Theory.
-I was confused on the explanations of how people are able to determine if they hear the phone ring in the shower or not. I understood the points of the hit and miss explanations but the graphs didn’t make much sense to me so it became a little confusing.
3.) I think the most useful information that I can use to understand Sensation and perception would be the information I read on neurotransmitters. Neurotransmitters are the chemical substances used in neuronal communication. The transmission of these signals is how we are able to sense what we are doing and able to perceive if that action is rewarding or harmful.
4.) Two topics I would like more information about would be a more detailed look on how neurotransmitters work and how neurons work together to learn about the world around us. I’m very curious on how my senses can make me understand what something is and put an image of that thing in my head.
Terms: Neuron, Neurotransmitters, signal detection theory, JND, Empiricism, Nativism, Molyneux’s problem, tabula rasa, dualism, monism.
The philosophicial background is important, definately. Thresholds let us know what we can experience from the world (and the many things we can not). SDT is important stuff, but can get confusing to people. Really its all about the true presence of the signal and the response of the observer.
Hang in there on the SDT stuff! It will become more apparent throughout the course.
Finding three things that are interesting to me in this chapter was quite difficult, seeing that a great majority of the chapter flew right over my head! Although, after a few cups of coffee I think I have managed to find some interest in a few topics. Hopefully my understanding of some of these topics will become more clear in class!
I found Thresholds to be interesting, mainly because this was the one topic I could really understand clearly. Thresholds from my understanding are what we perceive on a spectrum of our senses varied by intensity. I took Maclin's history of systems class and we learned about Weber's two-point touch threshold study and I found it quite interesting. This is the smallest distance you can still feel two touches on your skin before you only feel one. This interested me because it is pretty straight forward and I can test it on myself right now and understand it.
Weber's just noticeable difference (JND) or difference threshold was also interesting in this category of thresholds. The example in the book was easy to understand. When you have a small weight, compared to another weight, the ability to feel the difference is greater than if the "constant" weight was heavier. I found this interesting because I have never really thought of it before, but when thinking about it it makes sense. I want to know why this difference happens. In my mind, the idea of holding a heavier weight calls more attention for the brain to hold it, in comparison to the lighter weight. Like when we lift weights, if you are lifting a heavier weight, there is so much more to think about, like not dropping it! Whereas with the lighter weight, there is less to think about.
The second thing I found interesting about chapter one was signal detection theory and the levels of one's criterion. I have interest in it because I can think of many instances throughout my day when my criterion is really high! For example, my phone. I believe this might be true for many people these days, but I really do pay a lot of attention to my phone, and this really set's my criterion level high. I know this because I find myself checking my phone because I feel a fake vibration, which I believe is my mind playing tricks on me, which I now know is because of my subconscious criterion level. I am expecting a text from my boyfriend or friend, so I am paying more attention to it. The same goes for when I am waiting for someone to come in to my apartment. I think I hear things, but I really am must imagining these sensations.
The third thing I found interesting was the method of cross-modality matching. I found it incredible that people with "normal" vision and hearing come up with the same matches of a sound to a light. I have always been interested in how different people observe different sensations. This method of cross-modality matching really took me by surprise. I didn't know that we were all so similar with our auditory and and visual experiences. I have also been interested in tastes as well. My twin brother lost his sense of smell in an accident 4 years ago and I always wonder if his sense of taste is different now than others. The book mentions the molecule propylthiouracil (PROP) and supertasters and "nontasters". This study showed that people have different sensations of taste when exposed to PROP. So, I am thinking that my brother must have different tastes, as does everyone!
One thing I did not find interesting in this chapter is a pretty general topic. All of the math!! It all does really fly over my head and I find it extremely hard to grasp. Even if I read about the formulas over and over again, I still can't get the concept. Everything about the brain and neural firing really just puts me to sleep. I understand it has to do a lot with this class but it's really hard for me to keep up with it.
I think thresholds will be something that we come back to frequently in the study of sensation and perception. It will really help with learning about different sensations and to what degrees of sensitivity and perception do we respond.
I would like to learn more about receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. It seems interesting, but I am having a hard time grasping the concept.
Another topic I would like to cover in class maybe would be how much of our taste senses is actually smell. I am interested in this because of my brother and his accident.
Terms used: threshold, two-point touch threshold, just noticeable difference (JND), difference threshold, signal detection theory, creiterion, cross-modality matching, propylthiouracil (PROP), supertasters, neural firing, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve.
You should ask your brother about it. I would guess it definately affects the way he tastes things. The ROC curves are difficult to understand. I'm sure you guys will cover those in more detail in class if you ask about it. The math can be frustrating but it is present in most things in our world and can be extremely useful in quantifying and operationalizing constructs within psychology and especially visual perception. If you go into the field there's always some math involved in psychological science.
The three things I found most interesting in this chapter were; the psychophysical methods, signal detection theory, and neuron firing. The one thing that I found to be least interesting or the thing that was the hardest for me to understand were the areas in the brain relating to the biology of perception. And finally the two topics I would like to learn more about would be the signal detection theory and neuron firing and the measurements used.
I found the psychophysical methods interesting because as they all seem to be reliable and valid types of measurement for an absolute threshold. Absolute threshold was also interesting to me because it is the minimum amount of stimulation we need to detect the stimuli. This concept along with the types of measurement is fascinating to me, because it is something we deal with everyday. The measurements are also very different from one another and each of them may work better in certain situations. The method of constant stimuli measures intensities at random to find the lowest and highest that are detectable. The method of limits is different from the method of constant stimuli because the stimuli is not presented at random, but presented from highest to lowest or lowest to highest, and the subject determines when they can hear and no longer hear the frequencies. Lastly the method of adjustment is used by the patient themselves the control/adjust the frequencies so they can hear them.
I also found the signal detection theory to be interesting because the example given in the text is something I can relate to. Given the noise and the signal, depending on how important the signal is the more likely we are to hear it over the noise and the less important the signal the less likely we are to hear it over the noise. Also I found it interesting that the results are more likely to be false alarms if the signal is important meaning you are more sensitive to the stimuli. So depending on how sensitive to the signal you are, you could have a correct rejection, a hit, a false alarm, or a miss. Signal detection is very interesting and I would like to learn more about it because it is something I can relate to and have probably done the example in the text many times.
Finally I found the neuron firing to be interesting because overtime there have been so many ways to measure the neuron firing, and how information is transferred. I also found this to be one of the most useful ideas in understanding sensation and perception. This gives us a way to understand how the brain works, which is important in sensation and perception. The electroencephalography (EEG) measures the activity of all the neurons, the magnetoencephalography (MEG) are used to measure magnetic fields that are produced in the brain, positron emission tomography (PET) is used to measure tracers (through the blood stream) that are used in the brain most, and magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is used more frequently to measure where the neurons are using the most oxygen. This is also a subject I would like to learn more about, in some cases it may be hard to understand, but I believe it is important and interesting to learn about. It can give us a better understanding of the brain.
The one area I found to be least interesting was the biology of perception, particularly the parts of the brain. I found this area to be least interesting because to me it is harder to understand, but if given time and discussion I’m sure I would find it more interesting because I did find other parts of the biology of perception to be interesting. Although this was an area I found to be least interesting, I do think after reading it it is useful in understanding sensation and perception. I believe we need to understand the way the brain works and the biology of perception to understand sensation and perception.
Terms: psychophysical methods, signal detection theory, neuron firing, biology of perception, reliable, valid, absolute threshold, method of constant stimuli, method of limits, method of adjustment, electroencephalography (EEG), magnetoencephalography (MEG), positron emission tomography (PET), magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)
The technology that has given rise to our ability to examine the brain with these cognitive neuroscience methods is amazing. The biology of perception does get a bit difficult at first pass, but stick with it, its pretty interesting stuff. It's all just sensory organs detecting energy converting it into neural signals and having specific neurons sending signals in a very intricate manner.
I found the signal detection theory, Plato’s cave experiment, and panpsychism all really interesting. Signal Detection Theory was interesting because it measures the presentations of different sensitivities of the observer. I was reading another post from this assignment and found their example of your mind playing tricks on you if you are waiting for an important phone call and you think the phone is ringing but it is not. This happens to me all the time when I am anticipating an important text message and/or I am anxious to see what the person says. This happens a lot when my phone is on vibrate and I think it vibrates but it didn’t. It is a very interesting concept and I would have to say that my hit rate was probably really bad when I am in this situation because I think my phone vibrates about every ten seconds but I find that I am almost always wrong.
Plato’s cave experiment was interesting because all these prisoners knew was what they saw in shadows. So their perceptual experiences were probably so much more different than the men who were talking and holding the items for the prisoners to see in the shadows.
Thirdly, I found panpsychism to be really interesting because there have been experiences done where people have positively talked to their plants and they grow better. From what I have heard, this actually works. I am not sure if the idea is totally true because I don’t think my desk is conscious and I’m not sure as to if my desk can detect my energy that I am giving off.
What I found least interesting was the part about all of the cranial nerves, olfactory nerves, oculomotor nerves, and auditory nerves. The only reason why I found this least interesting was because I felt like it deviated from the subject of sensation and perception and went more to an anatomy spectrum. I understand that knowing something about these nerves is probably important to understanding the subject of this class as a whole, but the depth that they went into was a bit too much for me I think.
I think the thing that I read about that will help in understanding the subject the most was everything about the psychophysical methods. If we can understand all these concepts noted in the text then as students we will be able to understand thresholds and stimulus level graphs as well. Overall I would just like to know more about the dawn of psychophysics. The reason why I would like to know more is because I feel like the text really crammed a ton of people and laws and confusing theories into just a few pages. I felt like I was being bombarded with a ton of people coming up with a bunch of different theories and other people going off of those theories and creating their own and testing others and on and on.
TERMS :psychophysical methods, signal detection theory, panpsychism, Plato’s Cave Experiment, cranial nerves, olfactory nerves, oculomotor nerves, and auditory nerves
A lot of people have mentioned the vibrating phone phenomenon. It's interesting and you can see how this stuff applies to your everyday life. Couldn't the plants growing be related to the oxygen and carbon dioxide trade off when you speak and breathe? It seems like that "energy" is actually energy in the form of these two common naturally occurring elements that we and plants both emit and use.
In general, I appreciated the historical stories about the early experimental psychologists. It was interesting to read about how the theories came to be, and to learn about the psychologists who are credited with these concepts. I first enjoyed reading about Ernst Weber, who was interested in the sense of touch. He is credited with the different threshold theories. The first is the two-point threshold, which is the ability to detect two separate stimuli at the same time. Weber tested this by activating touch sensations on different parts of the body; he then recorded the accuracy using specified devices. Another threshold experiment credited to Weber is just noticeable difference, or JND. JND is defined as the smallest difference that can be accurately detected. In order to test this, Weber had participants lift a weight, the standard weight, and then afterwards they were asked to lift a separate weight of a differing weight. Weber found that one’s ability to notice a difference depended on the weight of the standard weight. More specifically, if the standard weight was heavy, then it was more difficult for people to notice the difference. If the standard weight was light, then it was easier to tell the difference.
Gustav Fechner also had an interesting background. What I liked about his story was that he originally began studying medicine but later “switched majors” to physics and mathematics. I think this makes him relatable to the “everyday college student” and it makes it easier to remember his story. Fechner was interested in the connection between the mind and the body. He proposed that everything in nature had a consciousness, even inanimate objects, which he called panpsychism. Fechner later sought to prove that there was a relationship between the mind and the body using mathematics, or psychophysics. The book portrays Fechner as being inspired by Weber’s work, and therefore Fechner seems to have some similar concepts to his theories. I bring this up because Fechner also came up with his own version of a threshold theory. His theory, absolute threshold, states that there is a minimum threshold necessary for a person to detect a stimulus. An example would be the ability to detect a soft sound, how soft would the sound have to be before no one would hear it? That would be absolute threshold.
Another concept that I found interesting was magnitude estimation. This is when participants are asked about their sensations rather than testing how they feel. Participants are often assigned values for different magnitudes of the stimuli presented.
I did not enjoy the parts concerning the philosophical reasoning and history of the science. I do not enjoy reading nor do I agree with some of the concepts presented. This had nothing much to do with sensation and perception, I just honestly dislike philosophy.
I find these concepts interesting because I can recall performing tests in my own lifetime that are relatable to many of the topics that I have discussed. Specifically, I remember doing this type of a test when I was young to test if my hearing was working properly. I was told to wear headphones and listen for the beeping sound. I was to indicate which ear I heard it from (magnitude estimation) and I had to listen carefully because the volume of the sounds differed (just noticeable difference). I picked these concepts because I could relate them to my life, making them useful for applying sensation and perception principles.
I didn’t understand signal detection theory and how it works, so I hope to grow a greater understand of this later on. I also hope to clarify even further the difference between Weber’s law and Fechner’s law.
Terms: Ernst Weber, two point threshold, touch, just noticeable difference, Gustav Fechner, psychophysics, panpsychism, absolute threshold, magnitude estimation
Those laws are important for sensation and perception and when we conduct psychophysical experiments. The philosophy stuff does bore some people, especially those who want to hear about experiments that were actually conducted. But the philosophy helps build a good theory and does influence how people approach larger philosophical problems in cognitive science. For example, in the case of attention and perception, there is a problem known as the binding problem. This basically stems from the fact that while we experience a coherent perception of the external world, all the features that we detect and ultimately perceive have to first be bound and integrated into a coherent whole. But we really still have no idea exactly how this happens in the brain.
I enjoyed learning about the anatomy of the human body and how it helps with sensation and perception. The image on pg. 20 where it’s of the brain showing the connection of the cranial nerves is so astonishing to me. The human body is such an incredible thing! The doctrine of specific nerve energies was also interesting to me. This theory states that it doesn’t necessarily matter how the nerves are stimulated but which nerves are stimulated. I also enjoyed reading about Descartes, Democritus and other philosophers. I personally find the history of medicine and philosophy extremely fascinating. I truly enjoyed reading about the action potential and the neural firing. The third item I found to be interesting was vitalism. Vitalism basically means there are forces in organisms that cannot be explained by physical processes. After reading about vitalism, it floored me reading about how quickly neurons were thought to have fired back then. I find anything about the human body interesting, I’ve taken some anatomy courses in the past and it’s nice to be able to connect other classes to this one to help me better understand the physical explanation in the human body. I believe the method of constant stimuli and the signal detection theory will be used to help understand sensation and perception. I realize that I use my 5 senses to help understand the environment around me but to learn exactly how our brain processes our incoming messages is intriguing. What may be even more amazing to me is the fact that the men of what seems to be ancient time came up with theories with limited resources that some stand true to this day. Two items I would like more information about is certain laws such as Weber’s and Stevens. The second item is psychophysics in general. I understand bits and pieces of it but I still have some loose ends.
Terms: Doctrine of specific nerve energies, Descartes, Democritus, vitalism, action potential, neural firing, constant stimuli, signal detection theory, psychophysics, Weber’s Law, Steven’s Law.
The human body is amazing and intricate. I think you'll find out more and more about psychophysics as you go along. The cool thing about it is you are just trying to detect thresholds for continua of stimuli and see where each individual observer's thresholds are at on that continuum. The underlying laws people discovered allowed for these methods to be created to be used as tools to explore sensation and perception. Based on the notion of thresholds, for example, people developed the method of constant stimuli and adjustment, where you see how much of a property or feature of a stimulus along a continuum is needed for a person to detect that stimulus. See if Dr. MacLin can show you some .exe files of some experiments we've with faces to measure the perception of race. That's how I learned about psychophysics, but actually doing psychophysics and applying it to a topic and question I was interested in.
The first two that interested me kind of go together; absolute threshold (when talking about sound) and signal detection theory. These two I found interesting because I was able to relate to it quicker than the other theories and terminology. This happened when I was traveling with my family; my sister and I were watching TV when I started to hear a noise. It started to bother me when it kept getting louder but I was the only one that could hear it. It took until the sound was loud enough that I couldn’t ignore it any more before my sister could hear it too. Obviously I was more sensitive to sound and picking up on the tone coming from the TV then my sister. The third item I found interesting was the cranial nerves. I was never good at remembering the parts of the brain and struggled with it in class but I always like looking at the pictures that mapped out the brain to what parts controlled or processed information from the body. The least interesting to me was the history. I took History and Systems over the summer and recall a lot of the names from other psychology classes as well. It just felt like déjà vu, unfortunately like the parts of the brain I wasn’t great at history either.
The biology aspect of it and how the brain interprets information and sends out signals (cranial nerves). I think how the brain is set up and how it functions has a lot more to do with how we act/behave then we think.
The two topics I would like more information about from chapter one would be more categories/stimuli that were used to measure absolute thresholds. And also neurons, particularly stories that involve when they can’t transfer information or misfire. About five years ago my Dad completely tore his Achilles tendon, and even though every fitness instructor I have ever talked to said that it is the worst pain you can go through my Dad was never in any pain. It makes me wonder if it was the neurons or the receptors in his brain that didn’t register the pain that every doctor said he should have been in.
Terms: absolute threshold, signal detection theory, cranial nerves, sound/noise, neurons, and receptors.
The history and the anatomy are important, but you're right, they are just a back drop to the bigger picture questions we can ask about how they inform our thinking today. Interesting about your Dad's perception of pain. Some people have a higher tolerance, which is basically a threshold. Some people's nerve fibers that give rise to our internal perception of pain require more stimulation for their brain to interpret that stimulation as a "painful" sensation or experience. It is pretty interesting and a high threshold can be a good and a bad thing. Some people with neurological issues don't feel pain, which is dangerous because pain in the brain is the nervous system's way of telling you to avoid that stimulation if you can because it may produce tissue damage.
Though it may seem like a painfully obvious place to begin, I was very pleasantly surprised to see the chapter begin with an overview of philosophy as it relates to the development of perceptual science. I find philosophical discussions to be fascinating, and putting each person's views side by side can be even more entertaining. I believe that an exploration of this history is integral to moving forward in a scientific discipline. Despite all we have learned over the years, that original debate between empiricism and nativism still rages to this very day. I also found Loewi's experiment in which he verified the existence of neurotransmitters to be quite profound. The simplicity with which he used a pair of frog hearts to prove that neural messages are transmitted across synapses by chemicals and not electricity is very inspirational. Despite being a fairly simplistic example, I also enjoyed the discussion regarding signal detection theory. We take so many of our psychophysical responses for granted, so even the most rudimentary example provides a great deal of intrinsic interest. We adjust our signal response criterions to various stimuli all the time, but yet we do not often take the time to appreciate our own ability to adjust sensitivity to outer stimuli.
I thought the least interesting topic was Fechner's panpsychism - attributing consciousness to inanimate objects just seems like a silly concept to me. I guess we can't necessarily rule such a theory out completely (where does mind stop and matter begin?)...but I just thought that viewpoint seemed pretty "out there". I believe the exploration of psychophysical methods will be most useful in understanding sensation and perception - those are the techniques we use to quantify interactions between our minds and the outer world. I would like to learn more about psychophysics and the validity of the laws suggested by Stevens, Weber, and Fechner over time. I also would enjoy further discussion of philosophy's effect on the discipline, though I assume the course will move more into the realm of harder science, since this is obviously not a philosophy class.
Terms: empiricism, nativism, neurotransmitter, synapse, signal detection theory, psychophysics, signal response criterion, panpsychism, Stevens' power law, Weber's law, Fechner's law
The philosophical foundations are important indeed. The inanimate object and consciousness problem is interesting indeed. I think the direction people are moving toward currently is that you have to isolate neural correlates of consciousness in order to inform how we approach topics like consciousness.
The first thing I found interesting in this chapter was the Signal detection section. It was really interesting to me that there is no an absolute level in which we become unable to hear sound. The reason we are unable being because of our nervous system, and also some of the biases that come in to trying to test hearing. The phone example also made some good points.
One thing that I read about in this chapter and read about last semester was just noticeable difference. Whenever I think about this concept I always think about lifting weights. One thing I always hear when lifting is that most people can usually always do a little bit more. The JND comes into play with that because there will come a point where that little bit more seems like a whole lot more.
The third thing that I found interesting in this chapter was Otto Loewi’s work with frog hearts. I mainly only found this interesting because I read that the hearts beat for some time after they are removed.
Although I liked the signal detection I felt somewhat bombarded by all of the tables that were in the section. I am not especially a graph guy, and I think I counted fifteen graphs in that section.
I thought that probably the most important thing that I read was probably the section on nativism and empiricism. I believe that it is essential to understand the difference between these two views, because it helps me understand why certain people I read about in the book were interested in certain areas.
The first thing that I would like to learn more about is the noise that we have to tune out in our bodies. Those noises have a effect how we hear and I would like to find out when our body makes the most noise. The other thing I would like to learn some more about is whether or not research has been done to try and decrease the amount of false alarms in signal detection. I believe that that the signal detection sections is what I will remember most about this chapter
Key terms: nativism, empiricism, just noticeable difference, signal detection
The signal detection theory is interesting and is used in a variety of types of research. The graphs are visual representations of the data or some principle that someone is trying to get across. If you know how to read and interpret the graphs, which is important in psychological science, they will become something that is helpful rather than something to avoid.
I guess I am the only one that appreciated the Matrix quote at the beginning of the chapter, but any textbook that quotes the Matrix must be a good read. Chapter 1 was a good read. I have the 2nd addition of the book because that is what the book store is selling. I do not know if there are many differences between editions in this chapter, but given the topics I would imagine not.
I think the first thing that caught my interest was the concept of adaptation. This is something that we go through all of the time, but probably do not think about hardly ever. Our senses become use to sensations over time if those sensations stay constant. An example is if we smell something bad the longer our senses are exposed to it the less we notice it because our senses have adapted to it. The book also talked about the variable pitch of emergency sirens and how that variation in the pitch keeps our attention because our senses don't adapt to the inconsistent pitch. It just blew my mind reading about this because these are things that you experience, but you don't really notice. It makes me wonder if emergency administrators did research to test what sirens would most acknowledge, or if they picked the siren noise without giving it much thought at all.
I particularly liked the section on Nativism, probably because it covers a topic that I think is probably an internal debate for most people. While most of the philosophers mentioned in this section mention the mind most people today would replace that with the word soul. The concept of whether when we die a part of us continues to exist or if when we die there is nothing left. I personally like to think that I have a soul and when I die it will continue to exist, but I think a lot of people ridicule that idea. I guess that sparks a question I have. Is it possible to be a dualist and be taken seriously as a scientist. Can Scientists believe in the concept of soul, without having their scientific integrity questioned? If anybody reads this let me know what you think.
I was kind of amazed when I read the part in the book about the difference threshold which in turn lead to the development of Weber's Law. This like the emergency sirens is something that you have experienced, but you didn't think about in the way this book talks about it. The fact that if you have two relatively light weight items the difference between them needed in order to tell that they weigh different amounts is relatively small whereas the larger two items are the larger the difference in weight has to be for you to notice a different in the weight. The more I read in this section the more I realized that I have experienced this before. An example of this is trying to choose between two bags of potatoes based on weight both are fairly heavy so it is hard to tell a difference in weight of each bag of potatoes.
I have to say that the least interesting thing that I read in this chapter was probably the section on psychophysical methods. It just was more of the nitty gritty details on how certain conclusions in psychophysics were rendered, which is important don't get me wrong. I think I just enjoyed the concepts themselves more. I think the thing that will help me understand sensation and perception most was the section on Nativism and Empiricism. This is because it showcased what thoughts contributed to ideas in sensation and perception, but also how to view these ideas. whether researchers in this field are nativists or empiricists would have direct impact on how they looked at sensation and perception and how they interpret things. That is why this section was essential. It sets the stage for everything that follows afterward. There is a reason why it is in chapter 1. One of the things I want to learn more about is Panpsychism. I do not feel like the book covered this topic that much, and it seems like an interesting concept. Maybe it really isn't that important though. I also want to know more about the nativist and empiricist views and learn about which has greater impact on current research in sensation and perception.
Key Terms: Empiricism, Nativism, Adaptation, Panpsychism, Psychophysics, Weber's Law, Difference Threshold, Psychophysical Methods
Adaptation is an interesting concept. We adapt to our natural environment in which we find ourselves. For example, your perception might be different living in Iowa compared to mine, living in Nevada, simply due to the surrounding environment. The concept of a soul in science is interesting. The problem with some of these questions is that they aren't often testable nor falsifiable. One's scientific integrity is maintained by keeping an open mind and not ruling out things that you haven't tested, but also the integrity is often measured by how conduct and practice science. Good science means admitting when you're wrong and looking for the truth behind some construct of interest.
One of the first things I found interesting from the chapter was Hermann von Helmholtz and his life achievements. He was originally a surgeon, but had always had a greater interest in the foundations of physics. His inspiration came from a man named Muller, though he had a disagreement in one of his ideas which was called vitalism. According to Muller, he believed “vital forces”, which are dynamic in all organisms, can’t be described by any physical process of matter. It actually takes some time for our brains to understand what is happening within the environment, and these are messages that are carried through impulses of the nerves. Neurons travel at different speeds and Helmholtz was intrigued with finding out at what speed these messages are sent to the brain and back to the body. Helmholtz also had major contributions with discoveries on hearing, such as activity of the cochlea, as well as vision and the ophthalmoscope.
Another topic I found interesting was discussed in material dealing with psychophysics. I find it attention-grabbing when I think of how early psychology topics and research was actually originally stemmed from philosophy. The founding father of experimental psychology and the creator of psychophysics is Gustav Fechner. Psychophysics is broken down in psycho, which means the mind, and physics, the term for matter. Fechner wanted to figure out a relationship between these two concepts that ultimately give us sensation. When we think about a particular sense in touch, Ernst Weber, an anatomist, is probably most notably renowned. He was able to measure the distance that touch appeared noticeably different from one pinpoint to using two, which Fechner would name the two point touch threshold. Weber also developed the idea of just noticeable difference. This was based on weight lifting where the most commonly felt weight difference was noticed using lighter weights, as opposed to a much heavier weight change was less noticeable. I find this interesting because it really relates to me when I think about all the times I have lifted weighted objects and how sometimes you notice weight change and other times you don’t.
Along with Similar concepts from Fechner and Weber, the third thing I found really interesting was Absolute threshold. Absolute threshold is the very least amount that it takes for a person to notice stimulation. This involves all five sensory systems. Each sense has an absolute threshold. I find this concept fascinating because it involves such small stimulations from stimuli, that they are almost un-thought of.
The subject I thought was probably least interesting dealt with cranial nerves. Whenever there are concepts that deal with brain names and senses associated with them such as olfactory and optic, I have trouble sometimes grasping how they work. Remembering the different parts of the brain can be slightly confusing and it is hard to grasp certain concepts when they continuously name these brain sections.
The information that I believe will be most useful in understanding sensation and perception is neural connections. Neurons and the way that they work to send messages to the brain gives me a better idea of why it is that we actually physically can feel things and see or hear certain things. The chemical substance in neuronal communication at synapses is a neurotransmitter. There are many different neurotransmitters in the brain, and they influence the messages with our bodies that give us these unique senses and the way we perceive things in our environment.
I would like to learn more about empiricism and some of the early empiricists mentioned like John Locke and Thomas Hobbes. I would like to find out more information regarding their backgrounds and how empiricism had an impact on psychology today. Another topic of interest I would like to learn more about is nativism. There isn’t a whole lot in the book about this topic. I do know that Rene Descartes was a major impact on the mind-body concept, as well as a little bit of his history and background experiences. However, I feel like there is more that can be learned from this concept.
Terms: Vitalism, psychophysics, just noticeable difference, absolute threshold, neurotransmitter, two-point touch threshold, empiricism, and nativism.
The historical background is important. Helmholz definately made a large contribution to science during his time. The philosophical underpinnings are also important and you can see how they influence the way we ask questions and the questions that we ask. The anatomy stuff can be dry but also it is interesting to know how the body is all connected and integrated and controlled by the brain.
The first thing that I found interesting was how Weber's law. I think that Weber's law is interesting because I have always noticed that people are not able to tell a small difference in things. I always think of this while being a broke college shopper. 50 cents off a dollar purchase is a big deal, but 50 cents off a 100 dollar purchase isn't a concern. I also found it interesting that thresholds were able to be tested on animals, in particular fish. The researchers used constant stimuli to define a fishes' ability to detect colored lights. The fish were received a shock after seeing a light, causing the fish to miss a breath. The researches classically conditioned the fish to pair the shock after the presence of the light. They were then able to detect if a fish was able to detect the light be seeing if the fish missed a breath. the third thing that I found interesting was, the different techniques that help to define thresholds. It was interesting that peoples thresholds can change on how the questions are asked. A threshold is a minimum quantity that can be detected and was often used in early psychophysics. Making the participants choose between options is even a better way to participants to get a more accurate reading. The thing that was the least interesting to me was the formulas. I thought that the concepts were much more interesting than the computation on how they arrived at the concepts. Many of the computations on differential sensitivity and magnitude of sensation only confused me more. The thing that I found the most memorable and will help me understand this class was the definition of the class. I was a little hazy on what this class was going to be about, but by clearly defining sensation as the process of decting a stimulus and perception as way in which we interpret the info, I understand the main premise of the class.
Terms: Weber's law, thresholds, psychophysics, differential sensitivity, magnitude of sensation
Interesting research on the fish. You can figure out what animals can perceive or are most sensitive to by conducting a number of electrophysiological experiments that don't require a behavioral response from the organism. That is pretty cool, because we can still figure these things out based on the methods and tools at our disposal. The formulas and math are tied to a great number of phenomena in nature and while they can be difficult to understand, they basically just give a mathmatical way to measure and define these concepts. There's math underlying a lot of these concepts, but don't let that turn you away from the bigger picture concepts that are perhaps more relevant to you.
After emitting the reading behavior of chapter one, there were three subjects that caught my attention. The first one was cognitive psychology. I have always thought of cognitive psychology only focusing on the brain and the way we think. However, according to the text, it states that with perception there is an psychological process which deals with past experiences, memory and judgment. Cognitive psychology elicits an awareness of "things" and "events" rather than attributes or qualities.
The second interesting fact that I noticed was the analysis of the retinal image. This is image of the object thats being produced, but it differs significantly from the physical object. If we were to see through the retinal image, instead of seeing objects accurately, we would see all images inverted, smaller and it would constantly change because we have two eyes. Clearly, the retinal image is not looked at but processed to an extent based on the initial impact by evironmental stimulation. This is interesting to think about how it would be if we did not see objects accurately and if everything was inverted.
The third thing that I found interesting was the sense modalities. There are physiological evidence that the input from different sensory modalities interact and are processed by common cortical pathways. For each sense modality, we will deal with our five senses differently and because the most research is on the visual modality, it will be most talked about. This is interesting because I did not know that each sense modality is looked at seperately when it comes to sensation.
I personally found the least interesting topic to me was the light section. Personally, I have already learned a lot about lights and how they reflect off of images and all of their different attributes. I'm not going to lie, I skimmed this section because I found it that boring.
People need to study sensation and perception because it happens every single minute, every single day. Unknowingly (I don't even know if that's a word) people will use their sense modalities and have no idea what they are actually doing. Before reading chapter one, I had no idea that we don't see images inverted. Sensation and perception is very insightful and hardly anybody knows that perception is the most neglected of all major problems of science, because it is the most problem out of everything.
I would like to learn about the noises that we unknowingly tune out and how many noises we actually hear a day. It's amazing to think of how everywhere around us, multiple noises are occuring and we are able to hear most of them and understand what they are, but are able to tune certain ones out. I would also like to learn more about Boring's findings on the senses in the history of astronomy. Although there is a very detailed paragraph in the book, it does not go into great explanation of how we use vision and hearing together.
Terms: elicit, emitting, cognitive psychology, perception, environmental stimulation and sense modality.
Cognitive psychology is just a higher order level of analysis that benefits a lot of the S & P principles. The light stuff is interesting because you have all this energy out in the world and if it is within our detectable range, we can sense it and ultimately perceive it. If not, we have no phenomenological access to it.
This chapter for the most part was a quick history lesson about sensation and perception. There were a few things from the reading that I found interesting, one thing was Rene Descartes first idea of mind-body dualism. Mind-body dualism according to the text is the idea positing the existence of two distinct principles of being in the universe: spirit/soul and matter/body. I just thought it was interesting because here you have everybody debating the mind/body issue saying it’s just or the other that exists, and then finally somebody came up with a dualist idea that both the mind and body both exist. I also thought Stevens’ power law, Weber’s law, and fechner’s law were interesting. According to the text Stevens’ power law is a principal describing the relationship between stimulus and resulting sensation, such that the magnitude raised to an exponent. Weber’s law is the principal that the just noticeable difference is a constant fraction of the comparison. Fechner’s law is a principle describing the relationship between stimulus and resulting sensation such that the magnitude of subjective sensation increases proportionally to the logarithm of the stimulus intensity. I didn’t find the laws themselves that interesting, but I thought it was neat because those are some of the few formulas you will find in psychology. These laws I think are important because in my opinion it shows some validity that psychology is a form of science, although some may disagree. Many people need some physical proof to see something and I think that this gives you that physical proof.
The thing I found least interesting was the quick history lesson mainly in the beginning of the chapter. The reason I though it was boring and really hard to push my way through was because, as a senior majoring in psychology, I heard all of that information in about every psychology class I have ever taken. Nothing wrong with it just had to pick something I didn’t like. I know that it is important information and deserves its place in the text, but it just gets a little mind numbing.
The topic of mind/body, and nature/nurture debate I think will be the most useful to better understand sensation and perception. The reason I feel that it is so important is because those debates are basically the roots of psychology. Psychology is all about society and biology, so I don’t know how it couldn’t be important to gaining a better understanding.
Two topics I would like to know more information about are threshold, and noise.
Terms- Mind-Body Dualism, Dualist, Stevens’ Power Law, Weber’s Law, and Fechner’s Law
The laws are interesting and inform how these principles are carried out. The history happens at most intro chapters of psych texts, and if you know it and have seen it before, skip over it and spend more time on new stuff you haven't seen that is more difficult to process. That would be my advice.
The first topic that struck me as interesting is the philosophical questions underlying sensation and perception. The first would be the question introduced in Plato's allegory of the cave. How do we know what we are sensing and perceiving throughout our life is reality? The question may not seem scientific, and in essence it isn't, but this question persists in pursuit of knowledge about sensation and perception. What each individual knows about their reality is what they have personally experienced. The conscious individual is confined to what they perceive; and furthermore, what they sense. There is a constant barrage of microwaves and radio waves in each and every day we live. However, they don't play as integral part of human experience as a very narrow array of wavelength does, the visual light. We know they are there through technologies that can sense them for us. This also raises the question about individual differences. Can i perceive the same object differently than you?
This question lingers on into the beginnings of psychophysics, the empirical study of measuring the "mind". However, how can one obtain consistent data if each individuals' perception is different? To solve this nagging question, statistics helps by giving the population a general trend; the normal curve. This leads to a more accurate view of perception, the signal detection theory.
Another area of the reading that I thought to be interesting was the Biology of Perception. J. Muller was very influential in the new perspective he took on neurology. Most psychophysicists at the time narrowed their study to how the neuron works, but Muller took the new perspective of what neurons were activated, not how. This lead a frontier of neuroanatomy looking at different regions of the brain and their semi-specific function.
What I didn't find interesting was the dualist and the mentalist perspective of reality. This is mostly due to my bias of materailism, and I personally believe that their is no "mind" in their definition.
The signal detection theory was most important to me in understanding S&P. It showed how "priming" can affect sensation and perception and how it pertains to us in everyday living.
As also indicated in the poll, I would like to learn more about the biology of perception and neuroimaging.
Good points. I think you definately can perceive objects differently than other people. There are the same properties in the object, but each person probably creates a slightly different "object file" that they use to define the characteristics of that stimulus or object. Also, we know from color perception research that people have different experiences of the same physical stimulus because of differences in their spectral sensitivities to various wavelengths of light. The biology of perception stuff will emerge when you talk about the visual system. The neuroimaging stuff is cool and important as well, and you'll probably hear about some stuff related to that. If not, let me know I can pass some articles your way.
Signal detection theory was interesting to think about; again, this was something that we experience all day every day, to think that my parents were not kidding about the selective hearing that I had as a child. I was at the park with my friend, her son was running about the park, and she heard his voice and could pick it out of the crowd when he fell. I did not hear a thing when he was yelling. Learning about this theory now is something that makes sense and it is the same way when you are listening for your phone when you want it to ring and give you something to do besides homework. Paying attention to some things and then ignoring the rest.
Thresholds both absolute and difference were interesting, I have never really noticed that this is something that we deal with everyday and I liked learning about it. The different things like Weber’s law and the factions confused me but I think that with some more experience with them it will be easier to understand. JND was something that is similar but different in the same way. When you can just hear something and just think that you see something when maybe you do not or it is not there. I do not know if I understand that as I should but I think I do. Please correct me if I am wrong.
The diagram with the brain pointing to all the different parts was cool I like learning about the different ways that the brain is influenced and which part is triggered for different things. Along with the neurotransmitters that was discussed later in the chapter. Something that I do not have much experience with in psychology is the biological aspect.
When reading the first chapter I was a little bored when reading about the people in the past just because all the other classes that I have taken has cover it already. Some of the people are new and some of the things that the book talked about and that was refreshing like some of the old philosophers but I do not want to continue to read about all the things that they did. It was interesting the first time, not the twentieth.
Key terms: Signal detection theory, absolute threshold, difference threshold, just noticeable difference,
Selectively attending to somethings while filtering out distracting or irrelevant stimuli is a challenge we are constantly faced with. Some people are better at this than others. Keeping attention focused on the task at hand can become difficult. With thresholds, you either detect some stimulus or not, or detect the difference between two stimuli or not. So with the stuff you're comfortable with and have been exposed to already, just spend more time on the new stuff that was more difficult to understand.
Selectively attending to somethings while filtering out distracting or irrelevant stimuli is a challenge we are constantly faced with. Some people are better at this than others. Keeping attention focused on the task at hand can become difficult. With thresholds, you either detect some stimulus or not, or detect the difference between two stimuli or not. So with the stuff you're comfortable with and have been exposed to already, just spend more time on the new stuff that was more difficult to understand.
I am using the Sensation and Perception book by E. Bruce Goldstein the 8th edition. Chapter 1.
*1. One of the most interesting things I found in Chapter 1 is that perceiving seems effortless process and we are not aware when we are perceiving. However, there are many complex steps that have to occur for perceiving to take place. There are four steps to this process: stimulus, electricity, experience & action, and knowledge. The process starts with a stimulus and then ends with the knowledge of that object. It is important to understand this cycle because it is how we see our environment around his.
*2. The second thing I found interesting is all of the figures in the Chapter 1 showing how the process takes place. The first diagram I saw was of the four steps of perception that is arranged in a circle and shows that the stimulus is in the environment and becomes to focus and then it processed, transmitted and transduction by receptors to the brain. Then the last step is the knowledge to perceive and recognize and then action takes place from the brain. There was also a figure showing the transduction, transmission and process with the electrical energy to respond to the object stimuli. These figures help illustrate how the brain processes animals, trees, or anything in our environment, which is very interesting.
*3. There are more than one research approach to measure perception and is interesting because we can understand how people perceive objects. One approach to studying perception is asking participants to describe the characteristics of a stimuli. Then there is a recognizing strategy that allows the participants to place a stimuli in a category. This is interesting to me because I never really thought about it because it is such a natural response.
*The least thing I found interesting is the detailed research methods of measuring perceptions because they were a little hard to completely understand. I think I would have understood the logic more if it was in a video and showed how the study took place instead of using just words and trying to show in a diagram how it affected the perception.
*The most useful topic I read in Chapter 1 is understanding that perception is complex and happens without telling your brain to do so. It is truly amazing how this takes place without our knowledge and we do not think twice about it. More people should read this chapter and understand to never take for granted their perception and sight of their environment around them.
I would like to learn more about disorders of recognition and perception and how people overcome these disorders. Also, I would like to know more about the therapy approaches to help those with recognition disorders.
This week I read through chapter 1. Chapter 1 focuses mostly on introductory material, so for the most part, it wasn’t too interesting to read. I enjoyed getting to understand more of what I am going to learn throughout this book, however. Coming into this course, I didn’t really know what Sensation & Perception truly is, but this chapter helped me come up with an understanding of the general topics we will be learning about. I am not huge into biology so I was dreading having to take this course, but this chapter helped me to know that its not that bad!
I love learning about adaptation. It is one of the topics in a biological area that I truly enjoy. The book described adaptation as “a reduction in response caused by prior or continuing stimulation”. I HATE this definition. It’s overly confusing and doesn’t help to describe what adaptation is. Reading through the paragraphs about adaptation, however, helped to give you a better understanding. The world is always changing and we have to change something in ourselves in order to survive. In order to adapt to new situations and lifestyles, we have to use our senses to understand how we need to act or live to survive in the constantly changing world. I really liked some of the examples shown in the book and I can relate to them. One of the examples talks about moving to a different city or town and I can relate to that. I was born and raised in small town Iowa and moving to Cedar Falls was a huge change for me. I hadn’t ever driven on an interstate or major highway in my life until I went to college. Cedar Falls is about 5x the size of my hometown, let alone the fact that I even worked in Waterloo. I also had to learn to live with girls. I grew up in a family with all boys- even my cousins. I have never really had the girl drama so coming to an all girls dorm at college was a challenge for me. I had to learn to ADAPT to my new surroundings and learn to live on my own.
I enjoyed learning about the several psychophysical methods described in the book. This is a topic that I would also like to look more into at some point because they interested me and, for the most part, made sense. The method of constant stimuli, method of limits and method of adjustment are basically ways of doing an experiment in which the subject is asked a set of questions. Each method varies in how the stimulus is changed and who is controlling it. Each method made sense to me and it was interesting to learn that there are names for things that seem so simple in our minds. I used to just think that experiments could be done anyway you wanted without having to label what method you are using, but that is not the case. In psychology, everything has a name and I find that fact to be very interesting in the least. I hope to learn more about these methods and maybe even try them out on my own!
I found the signal detection theory to be rather interesting. I don’t really understand it so I would like to learn more about it and maybe have it written out for me to explain! Basically, this theory is all about responses to a signal when a noise is present. The responses are measured in several different ways. The book shows an example of hearing the phone ring when there are other noises (in this case a shower running) present. The diagrams show that you are more likely to not hear the phone in the presence of a separate noise. This also shows that if there is a distinct noise, your ears can tend to play tricks on you and make you think that you are hearing the phone when in fact, you aren’t. I found this interesting to think about because I know that I hear things, especially when I am in the shower. I tend to be one of those people who thinks that if I am at home by myself taking a shower that someone is going to sneak into my house and kill me. I always think that the garage door is opening while I am in the shower, because I am usually paranoid, even though it truly isn’t. I don’t think I fully understood this concept and I would like to learn more about it eventually in order to completely understand, but I liked the examples given!
I did not enjoy any of the history surrounding sensation and perception. History is kind of boring to me and being a senior, I have learned most of this already. I know it is good to have these topics within your book, usually at the beginning, but I hate learning about it over and over. I found a lot of the laws to be slightly confusing because I wasn’t learning about them firsthand, I am reading about them in a book. I learn better visually and having things worked out in front of me, so most of these didn’t make too much sense to me. I honestly feel knowing the history would help to make my understanding of sensation and perception easier, however. These are the basics as to where this topic came from, so even though I don’t enjoy it, this is the subject I should probably pay the most attention to. Learning the history sets up the rest of the book as well as your understanding.
Terms Used: adaptation, method of constant stimuli, method of limits, method of adjustment, signal detection theory