Reading Activity Week #5 (Due Monday)

1a) The first thing that I found interesting was the disorder called agnosia and prosopagnosia. This disorder prevents the recognition of what someone is able to see but doesn’t affect the ability to see. Prosopagnosia is specific to the inability to recognize faces. This supported the idea of double dissociation, or the ability to recognize something as what it is, but not it’s specific details, such as a name to a face. I’ve heard of this disorder in other psych classes and found it to be really interesting. I also think it would be really confusing and sort of scary, to turn around and know a face, but not know who it was, while they act like the recognize you. It made me wonder if people with this disorder cope in someway by remembering specific details like nose shape or something, in order to identify familiar faces.
2a) I found the Necker cube activity really interesting. It was really difficult for me to shift my eyes to be able to see example C. I had to physically cover up a part of the first ambiguous figure in order to see the example C figure. I found my interpretations of several of the visual examples such as the one on parallelism and symmetry to not match up with what the book said is normal. For parallelism I didn’t match the pairs of lines together like the book did, and in the house example for object recognition I didn’t realize the last house was different until the book told me. While the book said these things were obvious I didn’t interpret them at all in the same way.
3a) I found the section on entry-level categories interesting because I just did something very similar that related to memory, but with different terminology. In memory these categories are referred to as network and feature comparison models. Network contains more broad information while feature comparison narrows down into specific details of each animal. However, in this chapter they referred to these very similar concepts as subordinate or superordinate levels. In addition it mentions that subordinate-level recognition is easier, in memory this is explained by the fact that objects that share more characteristics with the broad subject (like bird) are easier to identify than those that don’t. I.e. a robin is easier to identify as a bird than an ostrich.
4a) While I understood the Bayesian approach pretty well, I think it was the least interesting. I didn’t quite understand how all of the letters in the equation were determined, but I got the basic concept of how probability of what a stimulus looks like is related to the observation, and all possibilities of the stimulus are taken into account.
5) I think this chapter was really informative. I think middle-vision will be important especially the way our eyes find edges and fill in based on their best guess sort of. I think knowing that certain areas of the temporal lobe discussed such as the inferotemporal cortex will be important as well because it allows us to recognize certain objects. I think just overall knowing that our eyes are half processing and half guessing about what we are seeing is very important.
6) How, in what ways, does this chapter relate (build on) to the previous chapters?
7a) I would like to know more about illusory contours because they amaze me and confuse and frustrate me all at once. The fact that something isn’t there but my brain sees it and I can’t un-see it is a little frustrating to me, but also really fascinating that our visual systems and mind can do that. Another thing that hasn’t been mentioned in any of the chapters that I would like to know about is residual images when you close your eyes. You see an outline of the light-surrounded object you’ve been looking at, and I’ve always wondered how that works.
8) Like I said before I was thinking about what I recently researched in memory related to the visual organization. I was also just uncomfortable knowing my mind and eyes make things up but also really fascinated. I made my roommate do all of the visual activities with me to see if we got the same answers. She couldn’t do the face activity where you identify upside-down which face is wrong. I could see the irregular face but she could not.
9) agnosia, prosopagnosia, double dissociation, necker cube, ambiguous figure, parallelism, symmetry, object recognition, entry-level categories, subordinate, superordinate, Bayesian, observation, middle-vision, inferotemporal cortex, illusory contours

Next you will be asked what three things from the chapter that you found interesting?

1a) What did you find interesting?
1b) Why was it interesting to you?
One thing I found interesting about this chapter was the topic of agnosia, or originally called "psychic blindness" The book states that early evidence for a relationship between the temporal lobe and object recognition came from studies in which large sections of the temporal lobe were destroyed in monkeys. These made the monkeys act in a way such that they could see but they didn't know what they were actually seeing. I find this to be interesting because it isn't a topic I know a lot about yet it drew my interest as soon as I read about it.

2a) What did you find interesting?
2b) Why was it interesting to you?

The feed-forward process is interesting to me; it states that we notice a picture of an "animal" or of whatever we are seeing within 150 milliseconds from the onset of the stimulus. That's fast enough to mean that there cannot be a lot of feedback from higher visual or memory processes, this means that it must be possible to do some rough object recognition on the basis of the first wave of activity as it moves from retina to striate cortex to extra striate cortex and beyond. This is interesting because we don't often think about what happens when we see something; how we actually recognize what we see. I find this most interesting in recognizing people; why is it that we can differentiate specific people from the other 7 billion people in the world. How are we that advanced and what causes this to be able to happen so quickly is very interesting to me.

3a) What did you find interesting?
3b) Why was it interesting to you?

I find the Bayesian approach to be interesting somewhat; "a way of formalizing the idea that our perception is a combination of the current stimulus and our knowledge about the conditions of the world-- what is not likely to occur" I find interesting that there is a such thing as the Bayesian theorem which is putting this into mathematical view. I find that interesting because although it is confusing it is kind of interesting and makes me want to learn more about it.

4a) What one (1) thing did you find the least interesting?
4b) Why wasn't it interesting to you?

Above I stated that the Bayesian approach was interesting to me because of the way it puts the formula into a mathematical standpoint to explain the principle of what the theory is stating. As I read on about this and tried to understand the math of the theorem I quickly realized that this was extremely uninteresting to me. I have always disliked math (unless I understood it well) and I have always felt like trying to form an equation or theorem for everything is so pointless and as I was trying to understand and read this theorem I felt like I was reading pointless material.
5) What did you read in the chapter that you think will be most useful to in understanding Sensation / Perception?

6) How, in what ways, does this chapter relate (build on) to the previous chapters?

This chapter is building off of not just "what we see" but how we actually see it. We are focusing on the mechanics of what we see and how it is possible that our eyes can process such amazing information. This chapter is just going more in depth on the previous chapters to help us to understand how the process of what we see works in order for us to perceive it.

7a) What topic would you like to learn more about?
7b) Why?

I think I would like to learn more about the feed-forward process. Like I said earlier it is extremely interesting to me how our minds can process who/what we are seeing so quickly and fully be able to understand it. We see so many faces in a day yet we usually remember ever familiar face even if we can't place where we know it from. Even if we only see the face for a few seconds we tend to remember that it is a face we have seen before; this process is extremely interesting to me.

8) What ideas related to what you were reading (what did you think about) did you have while reading the chapter?

This chapter made me think a lot about how complex our eyes are; how much process is happening in everything we see and interpret. We don't often think of the mechanics of how things work; we are just glad that the do work. This chapter made me stop and think more about the small details and how amazing our bodies really are, everything they are capable of that we don't often realize or appreciate we just expect.

9) Once you are done with your post make list of the terms and terminology you used in your post.
agnosia, prosopagnosia, double dissociation, symmetry, object recognition, entry-level categories, subordinate, superordinate, Bayesian, observation, middle-vision, inferotemporal cortex, illusory contours, feed-forward process.

1a & b) What did you find interesting?
The first item in this chapter I thought was interesting was the homologous regions which is brain regions that appear to have the same function in different places. This wasn’t quite the most interesting part to me though. I found it interesting that the researchers/scientists used human subjects in this experiment. They used people were going to have brain surgery for their epilepsy, and along with that, they were used in this study. The patients had implanted electrodes for their treatment already; therefore they could use what was already in place, but using these electrodes to record visual responses. The observer looked at a collection of images while the activity of a cell was monitored. This study showed that some of these cells had specific “tastes”. This was interesting to me because they used people instead of monkeys. This showed that people are always eager to help advance science, even if they are not the ones looking for answers.

2a & b) What did you find interesting?
The second item in this chapter I found interesting was Gestalt grouping rules. This is a set of rules describing which elements in an image will appear to group together. The figure in the book, 4.13 shows lines that are intersecting each other’s. Our eyes tell our brain that the lines ARE intersecting and that they are NOT two different shapes. This is interesting because the tendency to see lines continuing in the same direction, we tend to group edges that have the same orientation. Our brains compute algahythms to figure what is right and what is wrong.

3a & b) What did you find interesting?
The third item of this chapter I thought was interesting was the section on prosopagnosia (face blindness), which is the inability to recognize faces. In the figure 4.45, the person may be able to recognize the object as a face, but not know who the person might be. The example in the book states that you could recognize a face as your mother without recognizing it as a face. This could be the case of congenital prosopagnosia. ; A good indication that there is a specific neural module for face recognition. With this evidence, it is clear our brain has a neuropsychological mark the separates the brain modules. This is referred to as double dissociation; a phenomenon in which one of two functions; such as hearing and sight, can be damaged without harm to the other and vice versa.

4a& b) What one thing did you find the least interesting?
The part of this chapter I care least about is the Bayesian Approach. The approach is a way of formalizing the idea that our perception is combination of the current stimulus and our knowledge about the conditions of the world; what is and is not likely to occur. Reading the first part of the section made sense to me, but as I read further into it, I became more and more confused, probably because I have not taken stats yet. The mathematical equations are the part that got me the least interested.

5) What did you read in the chapter that you think will be most useful to in understanding Sensation/ Perception?
I believe that firmly getting a grip on the middle vision section to be most important to me. There are five principles that should be gained from this section. 1) Bring together that which should be brought together; similarity, proximity, parallelism, symmetry, etc. 2) Split asunder that which should be split asunder; complementing the grouping principles are the edge finding processes that divide regions from each other. 3) Use what you know; 2D edge configurations are taken to indicate 3D corners or occlusion borders, and objects are divided into parts on the basis of an implicit knowledge of the physics of image formation. 4) Avoid accidents; avoid interpretations that require the assumptions of highly specific, accidental combinations of features or accidental viewpoints. 5) Seek consensus and avoid ambiguity; use the “committees” of middle vision.

6) How, in what ways, does this chapter relate (build on) to the previous chapters?
This chapter is building off the previous chapters by focusing on the mechanics and physics of what we see and how it is possible our eyes processing so much information. This chapter is going into more depth on the previous chapters to help us to understand the processes of what passes through our neurons and other structures so we can perceive it.

7a & b) I would like to know more about the global superiority effect. This is defined as the finding in various experiments that the properties of the whole object take precedence over the properties of parts of the object. I find this interesting because in most “brain games” we see out on the market; they use similar tests to increase some kind of mental power or ability. I would like to know why these types of figures appear in those types of test and what they have to do with gaining more memory or getting better spatial skills.

8) This chapter made me more aware of how complex our eyes are; how much process is involved in everything we see and interpret. We hardly ever think about the involved to make our visual process complete; I’m just glad that mine works! This chapter made me really think about the small parts and details and how amazing our bodies really are.

9) Terms: homologous regions, visual response, Gestalt grouping rules, prosopagnosia (face blindness), congenital prosopagnosia, neural module, neuropsychological, double dissociation, Bayesian Approach, stimulus, middle vision, occlusion borders, “committees”, global superiority effect,

The first thing that I found interesting from the chapter was looking into agnosia. This is a seen in some humans who are victims of a stroke. Agnosia is a failure to be able to recognize objects in spite of the ability to see them. This was particularly interesting to me because we often hear of people having strokes but we never really hear of the outcomes and how they affect these people’s daily lives and what they can typically go through. Not being able to recognize a face after seeing it would be a scary to cope with and I personally think that it would not only be scary but also be very frustrating.
The second thing that I found interesting was the Gestalt grouping rules. Which is a set of rules describing which elements in an image will appear together in a group. Our eyes often tell us one thing like in a picture that the lines are intersecting but that they are not from two different shapes. I find it very interesting that our eyes are such a complex system and that we may never actually know what we are seeing because our eyes automatically tend to group edges that have the same orientation, and our brains tell us what is right and wrong which could be totally different than what our eyes are seeing.
The third thing that I found interesting from the chapter was the bayesian approach; the idea that our perception is a combination of the current stimulus and our knowledge of the different experiences in the world that we have been through. The bayesian theorem is a way to mathematically put our perceptions and what we have as true knowledge together to make up what we are capable of seeing today.
One thing that was less interesting to me was some of the more “mathematical terms that went on throughout this chapter. The different theories that go along to get the mathematical outcomes of the bayesian became very confusing after taking the time to further read and understand each part of it it became more and more interesting.
Something that I think will help me better understand sensation and perception was the fact that this chapter continues to reveal the complexity of all of our senses and how each and everyone always connects back to one of our senses and how our brain perceives the information.
This chapter builds on to the previous chapters as it continues to go into the visual systems. It also takes a deeper route on the brain and how each region of the brain has a different part and are often so complex and very important for vision and could also relate into the other senses.
I would like to look more into visual disorders and to find out more about common ones that affect many people each year. Our vision is something that is very important and is something that we often rely on and don't think about what would happen if it was just gone at the end of the day and you would no longer have that to rely on.
Somethings I was thinking about while reading this chapter was more about how one can just lose their vision within something such as being sick. I thought a lot about some of the sicknesses that many people face every year and how each one could further cause some pain and discomfort for each person.
terms: bayesian, perception, senses, gestalt grouping rules, agnosis, sensation, vision, visual system, gestalt school

In chapter 4, I found a some things interesting, and other things especially interesting. I enjoyed learning about contours because I think it is cool how the visual system can go beyond the information presented to it by the environment, and form edges around the object to identify what it is. The occasional lack of an edge on an object doesn’t hinder a person’s visual system. Sometimes it may actually be difficult to even see the gap in the edge. An Italian psychologist, Gaetano Kanizsa, investigated stimuli that were missing edges and how the visual system still perceived the object correctly. Edges that are perceived despite lack of physical evidence for them are called illusory contours. An Illusory contour is a contour that’s perceived, despite a lack of changes from one side of the contour to the other in the image.

Another thing I found out about, because it was not really all that interesting was about an early group of perceptual psychologists that studied how complex objects or perceptions could be understood by analysis of the components. I have learned about these early psychologists in other classes but didn’t know that they studied perceptions particularly related to the visual system. Structuralists argued that something like atoms of sensation (color, orientation, etc.), and that perceptions were the sum of these atoms. But overtime, examples like illusory contours, contributed to the disproving of this argument. Disproving examples led to the forming of the Gestalt school of thought.

Gestalt theory, is somewhat of a familiar topic, i like it because I have learned about this theory in other classes, but its more interesting when it can be tied to the current perception class. Gestalt theory states that the perceptual whole was more than the sum of its sensory parts. A big contribution from this school of thought was the Gestalt grouping rules that guide the visual system in interpreting raw retinal images. This set of rules describes which elements in an image will appear to group together. The original list was assembled by members of the Gestalt school of thought. Lines of similar orientation have a tendency to be seen as part of the same contour. They “support” each other, in that two visible bits of an edge will actually make it easier to perceive a third collinear segment that lies between them, even if that middle segment isn’t visible. This principle is called good continuation, which means that two elements will tend to group together if they seem to lie on the same contour.
The Bayesian approach was not interesting. It got pretty mathematical and then just plain confusing, so I skipped the section.

I think middle vision plays a big role in understanding this chapter. It really breaks down how we view objects, the ambiguity of them and the combining of edges to complete a whole, cool stuff.

The chapter builds on the discussion of our visual processing system. The previous chapter discussed the parts and information processing, this chapter to me seems to break it down a little more an offer theories to many of the processes.

Middle vision seemed interesting, I might do my topic on it.

Terms: contours, edges, visual system, illusory contours, structuralists, atoms, Gestalt, gestalt grouping rules, retinal images, good continuation, Necker Cube, middle vision committees, ambiguous figures, texture segmentation, middle vision, segmentation

I found the history of how researchers came to realize the relationship between the temporal lobe and object recognition. Whenever I hear of some type of treatment that doctors are using, for instance the code chill used to treat those with massive heart attacks. I always wonder who thought it up and how they supposed it would work. In this case it was quite alarming. It is my understanding that two researchers studying monkeys destroyed parts of the temporal lobe. The most interesting part was when later others realized that although there was damage and subsequent agnosia but that certain pictures would excite other areas for recognition. I’m not sure exactly what it was that really struck me about this except I think it is super cool how the brain has so many ways of compensating for problems within.

The second part I was intrigued by was concerning ambiguous figures and the Necker cube. This is where our perception concerning an object can change when looking at the same object. The Necker cube is where the cube almost seems to shift as you are looking at it. Another popular example is the rabbit/duck picture. The picture can look like both and changes again while you are looking at the image. I think that this was interesting as I had just watch the presentation done by Dr. Maclin in my capstone class. The subject was about how witness recognition can go very wrong. This example sticks with me as it really is an eye opener to how easily our eyes and mind plays tricks and fools us.

Finally the disorders, in this case prosopagnosia. This disorder is so strange to me; it is hard to even imagine not being able to recognize faces. I had heard of this before but I did not realize that there is a congenital and acquired version of this disorder. There are a lot of odd and terrible conditions, but this seems like it would be really difficult to cope with in daily life. This would affect relationships, family things but also employment. How would a person with this have children?

This chapter lost me a bit when describing the Bayesian approach. This book has so much in it that is very technical and can be difficult to read. When I start seeing the word theorem and long mathematical equations my eyes begin to glaze over. I’m not sure that I think it’s out of boredom or serious lack of interest but that I know this is going to be difficult and I probably won’t completely grasp it after reading the section several times. The Bayesian approach and subsequent theorem is a way to mathematically describe how perception and stimulus works and how it occurs. The text refers to it as a more formal approach to understanding perceptual committees in middle vision.
I think that the perceptual committees section although just a very brief section really helped me grasp how the brain observes and perceives objects. There are rules and principles to help keep order but even the most organized committees can have issues where things get mixed up. The example of people talking over one another was a really great metaphor.

I want to learn more about prosopagnosia. As I read the section I realized I had a lot of questions that were not answered in the section. Although I have never met anyone with this condition it was still very curious to me. I wonder how many people have it, is it inherited, what types of trauma would cause it to occur to be acquired. I especially wonder how it affects daily life and what type of coping skills are used by those who have this condition.

As I stated earlier in another class I had watched a video of a presentation about witness recognition. When I read the chapter with all the ways our brain creates illusions and fills in the blanks, I thought quite a bit about how very scary it is that so much of the legal system relies on what people say they saw. The part that really got to me was the upside down photos in figure 4.45. When I glanced and even looked closely at the faces in the upside down position I could see no difference, even after I had seen the photos right side up, once upside down they again looked identical. If there is one thing I have taken away it is that I hope I’m never asked to recount an eye witness account of a criminal act. At this point I think I would probably decline and sight my education and psychology background.

Terms: temporal lobe, object recognition, ambiguous figures, Necker cube, prosopagnosia, recognize, Bayesian Approach, middle vision, perceptual committees

1A&B) I found reading about achromatic vision to be interesting, because it is something I’ve never experienced. Achromatic vision is the visual input from rod photoreceptors. Rods only respond to light levels from dark to light.

2A&B) Learning about different types of cone receptors was also an interesting part of the chapter. The processes of combining cone receptor input to produce our perception of color and brightness. All of this relies on the wavelengths of light, however we need all three types of cone photoreceptors to properly perceive color. I was interested in learning about this because it makes sight seem more like a computer program. My job involves a lot of coding, including hardwiring color in RGB terms, which is similar to how cone receptors work. I’m already familiar with how a computer breaks down a certain color into three different input values, but it’s kind of strange to think of our eyes doing this subconsciously.

3A&B) The beginning of the chapter talked about the “what” and “where” pathways. We know that object recognition relies on color to identify items in our environment. Despite where we see a strawberry, our knowledge and memories of previous encounters with strawberries help us recognize a particular reddish quality a strawberry might have. I’m interested in learning more about the processing of visual stimuli between the “what” pathway and hippocampus. It turns out there is quite a bit of research in the works recently, but researchers still aren’t sure how the hippocampus is involved with this aspect of object recognition.

4A&B) It’s difficult for me to get used to all of the physics at work in the text. Even with graphical representations of light wavelengths, it’s hard to distinguish how we interpret light waves to perceive the world around us.

5) Color perception and object recognition are major components of our memory, so I’m assuming they will be the foundation for later chapters. If not, I’m sure I will look forward to learning more about these topics in the future.

6) This chapter really builds on the knowledge from the first couple of chapters. Now that we know the basics of light wavelengths and the major structures and functions at work in the eye, we’re slowly piecing together how “looking” becomes “seeing”.

7A&B) I think it would be interesting to learn about the color vision that animals may have, and how it is different from ours. The chapter briefly mentioned the evolutionary aspect of color vision and its purpose for the four Fs. As animals have these same concerns, is their color vision the same? I’d also like to learn more about the trichromatic theory of color vision.

8) During the chapter, I was thinking about the individuals I know who are color blind. It made me wonder what causes color blindness, especially the very rare types, such as cone monochromat, rod monochromat, or individuals who are only color blind in one eye. What does the world look like to these individuals, and in what ways might they compensate?

9A) Achromatic vision, rod photoreceptors, cone photoreceptors, color, brightness, light wavelengths, object recognition, what pathway, where pathway, hippocampus, trichromatic theory of color vision, colorblindness, cone monochromat, rod monochromat

1a. After reading chapter four I was very interested in the phenomenon of agnosia or "psychic blindness". Researchers discovered this deficit when studying the relationship between the temporal lobe and object recognition in monkeys with lesioned temporal lobes. The result of this lesion was a group of monkeys who could see but did not know what they were seeing. These symptoms are similar to the ones found in stroke victims. Research performed later identified one part of the temporal lobe known as the inferotemporal cortex (IT) as playing an important role in the visual deficits of the monkeys. It was found that neurons in the IT cortex had receptive fields that could spread over half the length of the monkeys field of vision. Additionally, these receptive fields did not respond to the same stimuli that the usual cells in the striate cortex did. The usual spots and lines did not work but the silhouette of a body part and monkey faces successfully excited the cell. A neuron with a preference for an object such as a toilet brush shape was also found to be within the IT cortex.
b. I find this extremely fascinating because it suggests that we have distinct neurons for animate and inanimate objects that we recognize. This is an astounding finding when you take into consideration how many objects and faces that we recognize on a daily basis. That would add up to millions of neurons specifically for the purpose of recognizing a face or an object that we need for a given task. I also find agnosia to be an interesting topic because it can effect people who have suffered from strokes. This deficit in the visual system has real world applications and can be used to target the affected areas of the brain after a stroke.
2a. The second concept I found interesting discussed a disorder known as prosopagnosia. This disorder is characterized by the ability to see faces but an inability to actually recognize faces. It results when damage is done to a specific part of the temporal lobe. Research provides evidence that this is possible because different processes are involved in recognizing a human face and recognizing the face of a specific individual. Specifically the existence of congenital prosopagnosia provides insight into this topic. Congenital prosopagnosia is a form of face blindness that is present from birth which indicates that the human visual system has a specific neural module for face recognition. Individuals with this condition can recognize a general human face but cannot recognize the face of someone familiar to them.
2b. I found this section interesting because it discussed the concept of neurons that only fire when we recognize a face. It is possible to recognize a general human face but to not be able to recognize the face of someone who is very familiar to you. It would be very alarming to not be able to recognize any of the people around you because you would lack the ability to form interpersonal skills. Life would be very confusing and hard to progress normally through.
3a. An additional concept that I found interesting cited a research study by Quiroga et al that addressed homologous regions of the brain. These regions are known to be equivalent to that of animals studied using the comparative approach. The study found that just like the monkeys, humans had cells that only responded to certain stimuli. Some cells only fired when introduced to a face that they recognized such as Jennifer Aniston. Others only fired when they were shown famous landmarks such as the eiffel tower and the leaning tower of pisa. These findings suggest that we have specific neurons that fire when we recognize people or objects and that they do not fire unless given specific stimuli.
b. I found this extremely interesting because it gave insight into facial recognition. We have neurons for people we recognize and interact with on a daily basis and we also have neurons dedicated to people and places that we do not personally have experience with. Every time we view something that we have been exposed to before it causes a neuron to fire and allows us to recognize what is in front of us. It is almost unfathomable that being introduced to a face such as Jennifer Aniston's that we do not interact with on a daily basis still has a neuron dedicated to it.
4ab. I didn't find any of the reading uninteresting but I did find reading about Gestalt and Gestalt grouping rules to be a little boring and confusing. It is a lot of information and I have a hard time taking in such large amounts of information without breaking it up and receiving help from a professor who is knowledgeable on the subject. The basis of Gestalt is very complicated and is hard to read about without direction.
5. I believe that the sections regarding neurons specific to facial recognition and visual deficits will be most helpful in my understanding of sensation and perception. I learn best through case studies and applicable concepts such as disorders and deficits that fit into the visual system. I find it interesting and I am able to remember the parts of the visual system more efficiently if I can relate them to interesting topics like prosopagnosia.
6. This chapter built on the three previous chapters very well. It covered the visual system more in depth and focused on the specific ability of the visual system and its components to aid us in perceiving and recognizing objects. It utilized my knowledge of the striate cortex to further explain the processes involved in recognizing objects and human faces.
7. I would like to learn more about double disassociation and congenital prosopagnosia. I find disorders of the visual system and damage to one system such as sight not necessarily effecting another system such as hearing intriguing. I am additionally interested in learning about possible causes and treatments that have been identified with research.
8. While reading this chapter I thought about the possible causes of deficits in the visual system that would cause an inability to recognize and perceive objects and the treatments that could be developing. I am interested to look at the research to determine if treatment options have been discovered and if they have been, the most successful options for people with visual system deficits. I couldn't help but think about how hard it would be to live with a disorder like prosopagnosia that results in an inability to recognize the faces of familiar people. For this reason it is imperative that we continue to do research on these aspects of the brain and the visual system to find treatments for people suffering from this disorder.
Terms: agnosia, temporal lobe, "psychic blindness", lesion, inferotemporal cortex, receptive field, neurons, prosopagnosia, congenital prosopagnosia, homologous regions of the brain, gestalt, gestalt grouping rules, facial recognition neurons.

1a) What did you find interesting?
I found agnosia as an interesting concept.
1b) Why was it interesting to you?
I thought it was interesting that though they could see the object, but that they were unable to perceive what it was. I also started to wonder if there was a way to trigger psychic blindness naturally, as a sort of camouflage. i mean trying to work on the end of the semester project now, but that seemed like a great idea, a camoflash that makes you unable to be perceived by an enemy. In a way it reminds me a bit of “The Silence” from doctor who.
2a) What did you find interesting?
The Necker Cube
2b) Why was it interesting to you?
I had seen this illusion before, and had wondered how it worked. Seeing it switch back and forth in my vision seemingly of its own will, i thought it was very interesting that it was actually two perceptions of the image battling for dominance. I guess i had originally thought it switched as your visual field looked at it from a different angle.
3a) What did you find interesting? The Bayesian approach
3b) Why was it interesting to you?
I liked in a way how they found a way mathematically to show the interaction between what we are seeing, the probability, and our real world experiences.
4a) What one (1) thing did you find the least interesting?
Once again the Physics and Some terminology tripped me up allot in this chapter.
4b) Why wasn't it interesting to you?
I have no Physics experience, and only a basic biological understanding of the human body, so even though the text is explaining and using numbers and diagrams to explain stuff, i honestly just keep reading through it and accept that it is just not going to be my specialty.
5) What did you read in the chapter that you think will be most useful to in understanding Sensation / Perception?
What happens when we have a perception dominance problem is what i think will honestly stick the most with me.
6) How, in what ways, does this chapter relate (build on) to the previous chapters?
It took the sense of vision even one step further than the last chapter, not only focusing on how it happens, but how it can “Mess up”.
7a) What topic would you like to learn more about?
Prosopagnosia
7b) Why?
Because i thought it interesting and horrifying that someone could possibly not be able to perceive, distinguish one face from another.
8) What ideas related to what you were reading (what did you think about) did you have while reading the chapter?
Just started thinking how other optical illusions work, if they all rely on perception dominance, or what else can trip our eyes up.

Terms: Agnosia, Psychic Blindness, Necker Cube, The Bayesian approach, Prosopagnosia, Perception.

1. Agnosia. This is something I have heard about before that was actually really interesting to me. In biopsych we had watched videos on agnosia. People seeing objects but having no memory of what it is, even if in the past it was something they had seen multiple times, such as a telephone, or a pencil, they will have no recognition of it.
2. Middle Vision. This was interesting to me because it talks about how when we look at something, how we bring it all together in order to recognize it. I liked reading more into illusionary contours and the gestalt grouping rules.
3. Proxmity things close together are more likely to group together.. This is interesting because it can be related to so many more things besides just vision. Such as friend groups, romantic relationships,

4. I actually truly enjoyed this chapter. There were so many more interesting things besides the ones listed above. Recognition principles, heuristics, they are all interesting things to me.

5.The recognition section I think is really important in understanding sensation and perception. Understanding how our brain puts the pieces to recognize things were seeing is very important in how we perceive different things. I think it will be important throughout the semester.

6. This builds on the last chapter because it expands on how we see things, how it all comes together to one.

7. I would like to learn more about proximity, all the reasons why this happens, how we pull everything together in all areas, site, and life.

8. This chapter I mostly thought about how incredible it is that our brain can pull all these things together at once, focussing on so many things, making all these images in our heads.

9.agnosia,recognition, middle vision, proximity, illusionary contours, gestalt,heuristics,

1a) The first thing I found interesting was agnosia.
1b) I found this interesting because I find it incredibly fascinating that even though the eyes may be functioning normally, the brain may still not know what it is seeing. It serves to remind us that our bodily processes are very intricate and require all parts to be in good condition in order to do anything properly.
2a) The second thing I found interesting was the illusory contour.
2b) I found it interesting because optical illusions are very interesting. Seeing something that isn’t there is strange to me. In this particular illusion, you see a border to an object that isn’t really there. The fact that this happens is very peculiar.
3a) The third thing that I found interesting was prosopagnosia.
3b) I find this interesting because the concept of not being able to recognize a face is bizarre. If one can see a face, realize it’s a face, shouldn’t they be able to know who’s face it is? If the brain is damaged to cause this disorder, I would think it would affect more that just the ability to recognize faces.
4a) I honestly found the whole chapter interesting. Nothing really turned me away and made me not want to read about it.
5) The item I learned most helpful to understanding sensation and perception is the extrastriate cortex. This adds to previous knowledge of how we see by telling us how we perceive and recognize what we see. By exploring this new region of the brain, we can add to our basic understanding of visual processes.
6) This chapter takes seeing something to the next level and explores how we understand what we are seeing.
7a) I would like to learn more about prosopagnosia.
7b) I would like to learn about this because I want to know what specific processes are involved in this defect and how exactly it may happen.
8) All I could think about was the different animals I learned about as a kid watching the discovery channel and animal planet (before they went bad). The ways they were able to hide themselves made a lot of sense, and this acted as a follow up to what I learned as a child.

Terms: extrastriate; agnosia; illusory contour; prosopagnosia

The first thing I found interesting was the Gestalt grouping rules. This is interesting to me, because it shows that we sometimes see what we want to see. The things we see are sometimes the product of a pattern we place on it from previous experience. This could explain why we sometimes see images or patterns in random groupings of something, like a pile of bread crumbs, that may or may not actually be there. This follows into the idea of good continuation where the brain will often tend to group edges that have the same orientation as continuing in the same direction.

The second thing I found interesting was the Necker cube. This is fascinating to me, as I have spent who knows how many hours of my life staring at Necker cubes trying to make it switch directions as quickly as possible. This is an example of an ambiguous figure, which is a figure that generates two or more plausible interpretations at the same time. This is very similar to the animation of a ballerina twirling in place. Depending on what you want to see, the ballerina will appear to either spin clockwise or counter-clockwise. As with the Necker cube, all it takes is a little focus to make it appear to change directions. I also find it very interesting that the Necker cube is always facing the same direction for me whenever I first look at it, regardless of how many times I may do so.

The third thing that was interesting to me was figure-ground assignment. I found this interesting, because of how difficult it can be to go against the first impression of an image. There are 3 main principles that determine figure-ground assignment: surroundedness, size, and symmetry. Surroundedness means that if one object is totally surrounded by another, the surrounded object will appear as the figure and the other will appear as the background. When dealing with size, the smaller object is usually the figure, and when dealing with symmetry, a symmetrical region is more likely to be seen as a figure rather than the background.

As per usual, the discussion on physiology was the least interesting to me within the chapter. This is just something that I somehow find both interesting and dull at the same time.

I think this entire chapter as a whole will contribute greatly to how I understand sensation and perception. There was not anything that stood out specifically, but the whole chapter seemed like it will help immensely in my understanding.

This chapter builds on the previous chapters by going into how our brain processes the images supplied by the eyes. While the previous chapters focused more on getting the image into the brain, this one went a step further and discussed how the brain processes those images.

One thing I would like to know more about is the idea of heuristics. I think it's very interesting how the brain takes perceptual shortcuts to make sense of the world, even though logic may very well dictate that it is not an accurate representation of the world.

The biggest thought on my mind as I read this chapter was, "Oh thank you, finally an interesting chapter!" I found the whole thing very interesting, and I spent much of it trying to think of instances where the ideas talked about had been present in my own perceptions.

Terms: Gestalt Grouping Rules, Good Continuation, Necker Cube, Ambiguous Figure, Figure-Ground Assignment, Surroundedness, Size, Symmetry, Perception

Chapter 4
1A) one thing I found interesting was: Agnosia
1B) I found this interesting because it’s a failure to recognize objects. At the moment I fell like I have that kind of thing a failure to see. I recently had eye surgery and its hard to see. Angoisa has to do with not being able to see do to damage of the brain. This is interesting because it makes me think about boxers who are always getting hit in the head and loosing site.
2A) one thing I found interesting was: Lesion
2B) the book defines lesion as a region of damaged brain or to destroy a section of the brain. I have always thought of a lesion as like a gash. So having a deeper defininton is great to have. Its always good to have background definitions of the material you are learning. I find lesions interesting because it talks about the different things that have to be done so we are able to understand how we see the things we see.
3A) one thing I found interesting was : camouflage
3B) The reason why I found this interesting is because I have heard about camouflage my whole life. Camouflage has been around for a long time. Animals use it as well as humans. Animals use it for defense and for hunting. Humans are the same way we use it to hunt and in our military. The book talks about camouflage and how our eyes combine the surrounding patters to the object hiding. I think this is a really cool concept and its amazing that our brain combines the patterns together.
4A) one thing I didn’t like was: Bayesian approach
4B) the bayesian approach is interesting and gives a lot of information. The reason why I don’t like it very much is because how mathematical it is. It’s a lot of information and hard to wrap my head around so I am not as able to understand it as some of the other things that have a little more simple statement.
5) I think the idea of camouflage is a big component to perception. Because it really ties in to how we see things and how our eyes look at things and understand what we are looking at. Perception is a big part of life and what we are looking at. We can see things all around up but it matter how we perceive them. To me camouflage is more than just things being hidden the object it is about seeing around the main object looking at the whole picture.
6) I feel like this chapter ties into the last chapter of how we perceive things. In multiple chapters I have talked about illusions. I know this book is about sensation and perception I feel like these 1st chapters have been about perception how we look at things and how things work. We have talked about different parts of the eye and that has moved from chapter to chapter. This chapter talks a little bit more about the brain like the last chapter has talked about. Each chapter gets more and more in depth with detail.
7A) brain damage
7B) I would like to learn more about brain damage because it’s incredible how one little hit to the head can change the whole way we see. We are also able to have something pierce the brain and we can function as if nothing happens there is the flip side where we can change the entire way we act.
8) the main thing I kept thinking about was boxing of how boxers get different eyesight problems. My dad was a boxer in the army and I wonder if that is the reason he has the eyesight he has.
9) brain, brain damage, lesions, agnosia , camouflage, Bayesian approach, eyes, eyesight, pierce, sensation, preceptin.