Download References - Center for the Ecological Study of Perception and Action

Ecological and Representational/Computational
Approaches to Perception
Psychology 370, Fall 2004
Professor M. T. Turvey
REQUIRED TEXTS:
Gibson, J. J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. (Originally
published in 1979).
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED TEXTS:
Eckardt, B. Von (1993). What is cognitive science? Cambridge MA: Bradford Books, MIT Press
Fodor, J. (1975). Language of thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gibson, J. J. (1950). The Perception of the visual world. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Haugeland, J. (1981). Mind design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Haugeland, J. (1997). Mind design II. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lombardo, T. (1987). The reciprocity of perceiver and environment: The evolution of James J. Gibson’s
Ecological Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Marr, D. (1982). Vision. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Michaels, C.F., & Carello, C. (1981). Direct perception. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality. San Francisco: Freeman.
Posner, M. (1989). Foundations of cognitive science. Cambridge: MIT press
Reed, E. S., & Jones, R. (1982). Reasons for realism. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Part I
Foundational Concepts
A. What kinds of systems do we study?
2 A minimal model for system: composition, environment, structure
3 Intentionality and “knowing about”
4 Are epistemic, intentional systems the most general?
B. Organism-environment dualism
1 Binary opposites supported by organism-environment dualism
2 Notion of adaptation
3 Newton’s dualism of states and dynamical laws
4 Implications of the dualism for perception and explanation
5 An example of CES explanation
C. Direct perceiving, indirect perceiving
3 Two-term and three-term relations
4 The information hypothesis
5 What does a theory of direct perception negate?
6 The linear causal chain
7 Impredicativity and the problem of impoverished entailment
Syllabus—PSYC 370
M. T. Turvey
References
Dennett, D. (1971). Intentional systems. Journal of Philosophy, 68, 87-106.
Hanson, N. R. (1969). Patterns of discovery (Chapter III). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lewontin, R. C. (1978). Adaptation. Scientific American, 293, 212-228.
Lewontin, R. C. (1982). Organism and environment. In H. C. Plotkin (Ed.), Learning, development and culture (pp. 151-170).
New York: Wiley.
Rosen, R. (1991). Life itself. (pp. 1-23). New York: Columbia University Press.
Rosen, R. (2000). Essays on life itself. (Chapters 2 and 5). New York: Columbia University Press.
Shaw, R. E., & Todd, J. (1980). Abstract machine theory and direct perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 95-96.
Turvey, M. T. (2002). Lectures on perception and action (Lectures 1-3). Unpublished manuscript.
D. Simulative, projective, and locality assumptions
1 Simulacra and eidola
2 Alhazen
3. Properties
4. Principle of locality
5. Non-locality
References
Gibson, J. J. (1966a). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin (Chapter XII. XIII)
Gibson, J. J. (1966b). The problem of temporal order in stimulation and perception. Journal of Psychology, 62, 141-149.
Harrison, D. (1981). Bell’s inequality and quantum correlations. American Journal of Physics, 50, 811-816.
Howard, I. P. (1996). Alhazen’s neglected discoveries of visual phenomena. Perception, 25, 1203-1217.
Lombardo, T. (1987). The reciprocity of perceiver and environment: The evolution of James J. Gibson’s Ecological
Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum (Ch. 1-4).
Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton Century Crofts (pp. 138-145).
Sabra, A. I. (1989). Form in ibn al-Haytham’s theory of vision. Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen
Wissenschaften, 5, 115-140.
Turvey, M. T. (1977). Contrasting orientations to the theory of visual information processing. Psychological Review, 84, 6788.
Weimer, W. B. (1973). Psycholinguistics and Plato’s paradoxes of the Meno. American Psychologist, 28, 15-33.
Turvey, M. T. (2002). Lectures on perception and action (Lecture 4). Unpublished manuscript.
Zajonc, A. (1993). Catching the light. New York: Bantam Books (Chapter 2 and pp. 307-320).
E. The mechanistic hypothesis
1 Appearance and reality
2 Nature is inherently mathematical
3 Inert matter, passive machine
4 Pragmatic versus absolute truth
5 Right degrees of freedom
References
Crombie, A. C. (1964). Early concepts of the senses and the mind. Scientific American, 210 (No. 5, May), 108-116.
Gomatam, R. V. (1999). Quantum theory and the observation problem. In R. Nunez and W. J. Freeman (Eds.), Reclaiming
cognition: The primacy of action, intention and emotion (pp. 173-190). Thorverston, UK: Imprint Academic.
Haugeland, J. (1985). Artificial intelligence: The very idea. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (Chapter 3: Semantics).
James, W. (1907/1975). Pragmatism and the meaning of truth. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. (Lecture VI)
Juarrero, A. (1999). Dynamics in action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Chapter 1)
Krieger, M. H. (1992). Doing physics: How physicists take hold of the world. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press
(Preface)
Strong, D. R., & Ray, T. S. (1975). Host tree location of a tropical vine (Monstera Gigantea) by skototropism. Science, 190,
804-806.
Toulmin, S. (1967). Neuroscience and human understanding. In G. C. Quarton, T. Melnechuk and F. O. Schmitt (Eds.), The
neurosciences: A study program(pp. 822-832). New York: Rockefeller University Press.
Turvey, M. T. (2002). Lectures on perception and action (Lecture 5). Unpublished manuscript.
2
Syllabus—PSYC 370
M. T. Turvey
F. The Cartesian Program
1 Two conceptual strategies
2 One-time proponent of a two-term relation?
3 Rethinking the similitude and projective assumptions
4 Three grades of sense
5 Thought as mathematical notation
6 Problems and paradoxes of 3rd grade of sense
7 Cartesian Program defined
References
Haugeland, J. (1985). Artificial intelligence: The very idea. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Chapter 1)
Lombardo, T. (1987). The reciprocity of perceiver and environment: The evolution of James J. Gibson’s Ecological
Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum (Ch. 5).
O’Neil, B. E. (1974). Epistemological direct realism in Descartes’s philosophy. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico
Press. (Introduction)
Pastore, N. (1971). Selective history of theories of visual perception, 1650-1950. Oxford: Oxford University Press (Chapters 2
and 3).
Reed, E. (1982). Descartes’s corporeal ideas hypothesis and the origin of scientific psychology. Review of Metaphysics, 35,
731-752.
Turvey, M. T. (2002). Lectures on perception and action (Lecture 6). Unpublished manuscript.
G. Empiricism and the Man in the Inner Room
1. 17th century view of matter
2 Three perspectives
3 Locke’s intelligence loans
4 Correspondence, coherence and pragmatic theories of truth
5 Hume’s problem, Hume’s solution and Hume’s touchstone
6 Active matter
7 Generalized Complementarity Principle
References
Bohr, N. (1937). Causality and complementarity. Philosophy of Science, 4, 293-294.
Boring, E. (1950). A history of experimental psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. (Chapters 9 and 10)
Nicolis, G. (1989). Physics of far-from-equilibrium systems and self-organization. In P. Davies (Ed.), The new physics (pp.
316-347). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (read pp.316-328)
Nadeau. R., & Kafatos, M. (1999). The non-local universe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Chapter 5)
Pattee, H. (1977). Dynamic and linguistic modes of complex systems. International Journal of General Systems, 3, 259-266.
Pattee, H. (1982). The need for complementarity in models of cognitive behavior: A response to Fowler and Turvey. In W. B.
Weimer and D. S. Palermo (Eds.), Cognition and the symbolic processes, Volume 2 (pp. 21-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Toulmin, S. (1967). Neuroscience and human understanding. In G. C. Quarton, T. Melnechuk and F. O. Schmitt (Eds.), The
neurosciences: A study program(pp. 822-832). New York: Rockefeller University Press.
Turvey, M. T. (2002). Lectures on perception and action (Lecture 7). Unpublished manuscript.
H. The space enigmas. I. Berkeley
1 Molyneux’s premise and Malebranche’s bold question
2 Flatland and spaceland
3 The geometric theory of Descartes and Malebranche
4 Perceiving distance and size through association, not by calculation
5 Language as the metaphor, not geometry
3
Syllabus—PSYC 370
M. T. Turvey
6 Incorrigibility of touch
7 Does locomotion without seeing yield a definite tangible idea of distance?
References
Atherton, M (1990). Berkeley’s revolution in vision. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. (Chapters, 1, 2, 4, 11).
Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (Chapters 6, 7, pp. 163-185)
Lombardo, T. (1987). The reciprocity of perceiver and environment: The evolution of James J. Gibson’s Ecological
Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum (Ch. 6).
Malebranche, N. (1678/1997). Elucidation on Optics. In T. M. Lennon and P. J. Olscamp (Eds), Search after truth: with
elucidations of the search after truth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (read pp. 720-748).
Pastore, N. (1971). Selective history of theories of visual perception, 1650-1950. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (pp. 68-70,
Chapter 5)
Schwartz, M. (1999). Haptic perception of the distance walked when blindfolded. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance, 25, 852-865.
Seyfarth, E-A., & Barth, F. G. (1972). Compound slit organs on the spider leg: Mechanoreceptors involved in kinesthetic
orientation. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 78, 176-191.
Turvey, M. T. (2002). Lectures on perception and action (Lecture 8). Unpublished manuscript.
Walk, R., & Dodge, S. (1962). Visual depth perception of a ten-month old monocular infant. Science, 134, 1692.
Zill, S. N., & Seyfarth, E-A. (1996). Exoskeletal sensors for walking. Scientific American, 275 (July), 86-90.
I. The space enigmas. II. Kant, the nature of geometry, and the geometry of nature
1 The “outness” problem
2 Kant’s perspective on the man in the inner room
3 Is the spatial organization of visual experience necessarily Euclidean?
4 The fifth postulate and a plurality of geometry
5 The possibility of geometric empiricism
6 Is the number of spatial dimensions an integer?
References
Atherton, M (1990). Berkeley’s revolution in vision. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. (Chapters, 3, 5).
Carello, C., Fitzpatrick, P., & Turvey, M. T. (1992). Haptic probing: Perceiving the length of a probe and the distance of a
surface probed. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 580-598.
Cassirer, E. (1950). The problem of knowledge. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. (Part 1. I: Problem of space)
Gibson, J. J. (1979/1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (Chapters 1 & 2)
Jammer, M. (1993). Concepts of space: The history of theories of space in physics. New York: Dover. (pp.127-150)
Kline, M. (1980). Mathematics: the loss of certainty. New York: Oxford University Press. (pp.69-88)
Leibovitch, L. (1998). Fractals and chaos simplified for the life sciences. New York: Oxford University Press. (pp. 3-31)
Morse, D. R., Lawton, J. H., Dodson, M. M., & Williamson, M. H. (1985). Fractal dimension of vegetation and the distribution
of arthropod body lengths. Nature, 314, 731-733.
Turvey, M. T. (2002). Lectures on perception and action (Lecture 9). Unpublished manuscript.
Shorrocks, B., Marsters, J., Ward, I., & Evennett, P. J. (1991). The fractal dimension of lichens and the distribution of
arthropod body lengths. Functional Ecology, 5, 457-460.
J. The space enigmas. III. Local signs and geometrical empiricism
1 Lotze’s claim that space perception must have non-spatial beginnings
2 Concept of manifold
3 Metrical groundform
4 Geodesics and curvature
5 Postulate of free mobility
6 Retinal local signs, Donders’s and Listing’s Laws
References
Boring, E. (1950). A history of experimental psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. (pp. 261-270)
d’Abro, A. (1927/1950). The evolution of scientific thought from Newton to Einstein. New York: Dover (Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4 &
7)
Crawford, J. D., & Villis, T. (1995). How do motor systems deal with the problems of controlling three-dimensional rotations?
4
Syllabus—PSYC 370
M. T. Turvey
Journal of Motor Behavior, 27, 89-99.
Helmholtz, von H. (1868a/1977). On the origin and significance of the axioms of geometry. In R. S. Cohen and Y. Elkana
(Eds.), Herman von Helmholtz: Epistemological writings. Boston: Reidel.
Helmholtz, von H. (1868b/1977). On the facts underlying geometry. In R. S. Cohen and Y. Elkana (Eds.), Herman von
Helmholtz: Epistemological writings. Boston: Reidel.
Koenderink, J. (1990). The brain a geometry engine. Psychological Research, 52, 122-127.
Pastore, N. (1971). Selective history of theories of visual perception, 1650-1950. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (pp. 151158)
Turvey, M. T. (2002). Lectures on perception and action (Lecture 10). Unpublished manuscript.
Turvey, M. T. (2004). Space (and its perception): The first and final frontier. Ecological Psychology. 16, 25-29.
K. The doctrines of sensations and unconscious inferences
1 Doctrine of elemental sensations
2 Law of isolated conduction
3 Doctrine of specific nerve energies
4 Reid’s alternative possibility
5 Properties of sensations
6 Helmholtz’s variant of the Cartesian program
References
Boring, E. (1950). A history of experimental psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. (Chapter 15)
Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (Chapters 1-3)
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (pp. 52-64)
Helmholtz, von H. (1868/1968). Recent progress of the theory of vision. In R. M. Warren and R. P. Warren (Eds.), Helmholtz
on perception: its physiology and development (pp. 59-136). New York: Wiley.
Helmholtz, von H. (1879/1968). The facts of perception. In R. M. Warren and R. P. Warren (Eds.), Helmholtz on perception:
its physiology and development (pp. 207-231). New York: Wiley.
Hochberg, J. (1974). Higher-order stimuli and inter-response coupling in the perception of the visual world. In R. B. MacLeod
and H. L. Pick (Eds.), Perception: Essays in honor of James J. Gibson (pp.17-39). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Pastore, N. (1971). Selective history of theories of visual perception, 1650-1950. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Chapter 9)
Turvey, M. T. (2002). Lectures on perception and action (Lecture 11). Unpublished manuscript.
L. Space enigmas IV: Abduction and learning the rules for perceiving space
1 Rules from associations?
2 Problem of induction/projectible predicates
3 Peirce’s abduction and the abduction (or frame) problem
4 Pavlovian learning of regularities of succession that one cannot control
5. Non-obvious experience
6. Central dogma of molecular biology
7. Probabilistic epigenesis
References
Brunswick, E. (1952). The conceptual framework of psychology (pp. 16-33). In O. Neurath (Ed.), International encyclopedia
of unified science, Volume 1, Number 10. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dennett, D. (1984). Cognitive wheels: The frame problem of AI. In C. Hookway (Ed.), Minds, machines and evolution. (pp.
129-151). Cambridge: Cambidge University Press.
Fodor, J. (2000). The mind doesn’t work that way. Boston: MIT Press. (Chapters 2 & 3)
Gottlieb, G. (2000). Environmental and behavioral influences on gene activity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9,
93-97.
Harris, J. F., & Hoover, K. (1983). Abduction and the new riddle of induction. In E. Freeman (Ed.), The relevance of Charles
Peirce (pp. 132-144) LaSalle, ILL: Hegeler Institute.
Mazur, J. E. (1998). Learning and behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. (pp. 73-76, 88-100)
Miller, D. (1997). The effects of nonobvious forms of experience on the development of instinctive behavior. In C. dent-Read
& P. Zukow-Goldring (Ed.), Evolving explanations of development (pp. 457-507). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
5
Syllabus—PSYC 370
M. T. Turvey
Turvey, M. T., Shaw, R., Reed, E., & Mace, W. (1981). Ecological laws of perceiving and acting: In reply to Fodor &
Pylyshyn (1981). Cognition, 9, 237-304 (pp. 245-251).
Turvey, M. T. & Shaw, R.E. (1979). The primacy of perceiving: An ecological reformulation of perception for understanding
memory. In L-G Nilsson (Ed.), Perspectives in memory research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum (only pp. 173-178).
Turvey, M. T. (2002). Lectures on perception and action (Lecture 12). Unpublished manuscript.
M. Gestalt Psychology I: Atomism, anatomism, and mechanistic order
1 Machine metaphor
2 Machine as superposed mechanical units
3 Machine as simulacrum
4 Helmholtz’s mechanical view
5 Mechanical order
References
Cassirer, E. (1950). The problem of knowledge. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. (Chapter 5)
Einstein, A., & Infeld, L. (1938/1966). The evolution of physics. New York: Simon & Schuster. (Chapters 1 and 2)
Krieger, M. (1992), Doing physics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. (pp. 19-23)
Rosen, R. (1988). The epistemology of complexity. In J. A. S. Kelso, A. J. Mandell, & M. F. Shlesinger (Eds.), Dynamic
patterns in complex systems (pp. 7-29). Singapore: World Scientific.
Rosen, R. (2000). Essays on life itself. New York: Columbia University Press. (Chapter 19)
Turvey, M. T. (2002). Lectures on perception and action (Lecture 13). Unpublished manuscript.
N. Gestalt Psychology II: Dynamics, strategic reductionism, psycho-neural isomorphism
1. The primacy and continuity of the laws of dynamics
2. Strategic reductionism
3. Constancy hypothesis
4. "Why do things look as they do?"
5. The geographical and behavioral environments
References
Fodor, J. (1975). Language of thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (Introduction).
Hochberg, J. (1957). Effect of the Gestalt revolution: The Cornell symposium on perception. Psychological Review, 64, 1619.
Koffka, K. (1935). Principles of gestalt psychology. NY: Harcourt-Brace (Ch. 2, 3 & 4).
Köhler, W. (1947). Gestalt psychology. NY: Liverwright (Ch. 4, 5 & 6).
Köhler, W. (1969). The task of gestalt psychology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press (Introduction, Ch. 1, 2 &3).
Lombardo, T. (1987). The reciprocity of perceiver and environment: The evolution of James J. Gibson’s Ecological
Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum (Ch. 9).
Pastore, N. (1971). Selective history of theories of visual perception, 1650-1950. NY: Oxford University Press (Ch. 14).
Prentice, W.H.C. (1969). The systematic study of Wolfgang Köhler. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science, Vol
I. NY: McGraw-Hill.
Shaw, R.E. & Turvey, M.T. (1981). Coalitions as models for ecosystems: A realist perspective on perceptual organization. In
M. Kubovy and J. Pomerantz (Eds.), Perceptual organization. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum (Part A).
Stadler, M. & Kruse, P. (1990). The self-organization perspective in cognition research: Historical remarks and new
experimental approaches. In H. Haken & M. Stadler (Eds.), Synergetics of cognition. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Part II
The Representational/Computational Perspective
6
Syllabus—PSYC 370
M. T. Turvey
A. Preliminaries
1 Computational, representational, property, and grouping assumptions
2 Peirce’s four aspects of representation
3 Cognition as disembodied and propositional
References
Eckardt, B. Von (1993). What is cognitive science? Cambridge MA: Bradford Books, MIT Press (pp. 50-51, Ch. 2, 4).
Kirsch, D. (1991). Foundations of AI: The big issues. Artificial Intelligence, 47, 3-30.
B. Representation Bearers and Pattern Recognition
1. The Hoffding Step
2. Templates, prototypes, exemplars, feature lists, frames, structural descriptions
3. Efficiency of algorithms
4. Constituent structure: productivity, systematicity, and compositionality
5. Problem of perceiving change
References
Devlin, K. (1999). Mathematics: The new golden age. New York: Columbia University Press (Chapter: 11)
Dewdney, A. K. (1989). The Turing omnibus. Rockville, MD: Computer Science Press. (Chapter: 33)
Eckardt, B. Von (1993). What is cognitive science? Cambridge MA: Bradford Books, MIT Press (pp. 50-51; Ch. 5)
Medin, D., & Thau, D. (1992). Theories, constraints, and cognition. In H. Pick, P. van den Broek & D. Knill (Eds.), Cognition:
Conceptual and methodological issues (pp. 165-188). Washington, DC: APA.
Minsky, M. (1981). A Framework for representing knowledge. In J. Haugeland (Ed.), Mind Design. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive Psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. (Chapters 3 & 4).
Shaw, R., & Pittenger, J. (1978). Perceiving change. In H. Pick & E. Saltzman (Ed.), Modes of perceiving and processing
information (pp. 187-204). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
C. The Computational System Assumption and Computational Vision
1. Turing machine, von Neuman machine
2. Token physicalism and Turing reductionism
3. Scene analysis by machine
4. Modularity
5. Connectionism
References
Cohen, P. R., & Feigenbaum, E. A. (1989). The handbook of artificial intelligence, Volume III. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley. (pp. 127-167).
Dewdney, A. K. (1989). The Turing omnibus. Rockville, MD: Computer Science Press. (Chpt: 17).
Eckardt, B. Von (1993). What is cognitive science? Cambridge MA: Bradford Books, MIT Press (Ch 3, 9).
Fodor, J. (1981). The mind-body problem. Scientific American, 244, 114-123.
Fodor, J. (1985). Précis of “The modularity of mind.” The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8, 1-42. (pp. 1-5).
Marr, D. (1981). Artificial intelligence: A personal view. In J. Haugeland (Ed.), Mind Design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Marr, D. (1982). Vision. San Franscisco: Freeman (Chaps 1 and 4, pp.41-54, pp. 295-302).
Rumelhart, D. E. (1989). The architecture of mind: A connectionist approach. In M. Posner (Ed.) Foundations of cognitive
science. Cambridge: MIT press (pp. 134-159).
Ullman, S. (1996). High-level vision: Object recognition and visual cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Chapter 2).
D. Counterpoints: toward embodied, embedded cognition
1. Symbol grounding problem
2. The discrete (symbolic) and continuous (dynamic) modes
7
Syllabus—PSYC 370
M. T. Turvey
3.
4.
5.
Intelligence without concepts
Selection theory of immune response
Embodied, embedded cognition
References
Brooks, R. (1991). Intelligence without representation. Artificial Intelligence, 47, 139-159.
Brooks, R. A. (1991). New approaches to robotics. Science, 253, 1227-1232.
Carello, C., Turvey, M.T., Kugler, P.N., & Shaw, R.E. (1984). Inadequacies of the computer metaphor. In M. Gazzaniga (Ed.),
Handbook of cognitive neuroscience. NY: Plenum.
Churchland, P.M., & Churchland, P.S. (1990). Could a machine think? Scientific American, 262, 32-39.
Clark, A. (1999). Being there. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Chapters 1, 5 & 6)
Eckardt, B. Von (1993). What is cognitive science? Cambridge MA: Bradford Books, MIT Press (Ch 6-9).
Edelman, G. M. (1992). Bright air, brilliant fire (Chs 5-8). New York: Basic Books.
Efken, J., & Shaw, R. E. (1992). Ecological perspectives on the new artificial intelligence. Ecological Psychology, 4, 247-270.
Fodor, J., & Pylyshyn, Z. (1988). Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis. In S. Pinker & J. Mehler
(Eds.), Connections and symbols. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Searle, J.R. (1981). Minds, brains and programs. In J. Haugeland (Ed.), Mind Design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Searle, J.R. (1990). Is the brain’s mind a computer program? Scientific American, 262, 26-31.
Van Gelder, T. (1998). The dynamical hypothesis in cogntive science. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 615-665 (read
to p. 628).
PART III
The Ecological Approach
A. Barriers to Realism
1. organism-environment dualism
2. doctrine of intractable nonspecificity
3. doctrine of independence of perception from stimulation
4. incommensurability of natural kinds
5. reality defined in an absolute sense
6. perception as proposition-making and fallible
7. completeness of physics
References
Kennedy, J.M., Green, C., Nicholls, A., & Liu, C. H. (1992). Illusions and knowing what is real. Ecological Psychology, 4,
153-172.
Kennedy, J. M., & Portal, A. (1990). Illusions: Can a change of vantage point and invariant impressions remove deception?
Ecological Psychology, 2, 37-53.
Griffiths, P. E., & Gray, R. D. (2001). Darwinism and developmental systems. In S. Oyama, P. E. Griffiths, and R. D. Gray
(Eds.), Cycles of contingency: Developmental systems and evolution (pp. 195-218). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Shaw, R.E., Turvey, M.T., & Mace, W.M. (1982). Ecological psychology: The consequence of a commitment to realism. In W.
Weimer & D. Palermo (Eds.), Cognition and the symbolic processes, II. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(only pp. 159-177).
Shaw, R.E. & Turvey, M.T. (1981). Coalitions as models for ecosystems: A realist perspective on perceptual organization. In
M. Kubovy & M. Pomerantz (Eds.), Perceptual organization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (only pp. 353375).
Swenson, R. & Turvey, M. T. (1991). Thermodynamic reasons for perception-action cycles. Ecological Psychology, 3, 317348.
Turvey, M.T. & Carello, C. (1981). Cognition: The view from ecological realism. Cognition, 10, 313-321.
Turvey, M.T. & Shaw, R.E. (1979). The primacy of perceiving: An ecological reformulation of perception for understanding
memory. In L-G. Nilsson (Eds.), Perspectives on memory research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (pp. 167189).
8
Syllabus—PSYC 370
M. T. Turvey
Turvey, M.T. & Shaw, R.E. (1995). Toward an ecological physics and a physical psychology. In R. Solso & D. Massaro (Eds.),
The science of the mind: 2001 and beyond (pp. 144-169). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Turvey, M. T., & Shaw, R. E. (1999). Ecological foundations of cognition: I. Symmetry and specificity of animal-environment
systems. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6, 95-110.
Wells, A. J. (2002). Gibson’s affordances and Turing’s theory of computation. Ecological Psychology, 14, 141-180.
B. Issue of specificity
1. Non specificity and problem of “right degrees of freedom”
2. Unconditional and conditional regularities
3. Specificity as 1:1 functions?
4. Specificity of different orders?
5. Specificity of different attensities?
6. Specificity and the statistics of ecological nesting
References
Anderson, J. R., & Schooler, L. J. (1991). Reflections of the environment in memory. Psychological Science, 2, 396-408.
Runeson, S. (1988). The distorted room illusion, equivalent configurations, and the specificity of static optic arrays. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 295-304.
Stoffregen, T. A., & Bardy, B. B. (2001). On specification and the senses. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, only pp. 195212.
Jacobs, D. M., & Michaels, C. F. (2002). On the apparent paradox of learning and realism. Ecological Psychology, 14,127-139.
C. Ontology appropriate to the ecological scale
1. rejection of the classical dichotomies (being vs. becoming, substance vs. form)
2. persistence-change pairings
3. ecological principle of nesting
4. inadequacies of orthodox concepts of space and time
5. ground, horizon, and surface hypotheses
6. laws and qualities of substantial surfaces
7. possibilism and prospective control
References
Gibson, J. J. (1950). The perception of the visual world. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (Chapters 1-6).
Gibson, J.J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (Part I, Ch. 8, and pp. 147-148).
Gibson, J.J. (1975). Events are perceivable but time is not. In J.T. Fraser & N. Lawrence (Eds.), The study of time, Vol. II.
NY: Springer-Verlag.
Michaels, C.F. & Carello, C. (1981). Direct perception. NY: Prentice Hall. (Ch. 1).
Ooi, T. L., Wu, B., & He, Z. J. (2001). Distance determined by the angular declination below the horizon. Nature, 414, 197200.
Reed, E.S. & Jones, R. (1982). Reasons for realism. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (2.9, 4.6, 4.7, 4.9).
Meng, J. C., & Sedgwick, H. A. (2001). Distance perception mediated through nested contact relations among surfaces.
Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 1-15.
Shaw, R. E. & Warren, W. H., Jr. (1985). Events and Encounters as Units of Analysis for Ecological Psychology. In W. H.
Warren, Jr. & R. E. Shaw (Eds.), Persistence and Change: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Event
Perception (pp 1 – 27). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sinai, M. J., Ooi, T. L., & He, Z. J. (1998). Terrain influences the accurate judgement of distance. Nature, 395, 497-500.
Turvey, M.T., Shaw, R.E., Reed, E.S., & Mace, W.M. (1981). Ecological laws of perceiving and acting: In reply to Fodor and
Pylyshyn (1981). Cognition, 9, 237-304. (Section 5).
Turvey, M. T. (1992). Affordances and prospective control: An outline of the ontology. Ecological Psychology, 4, 173-187.
Wu, B., Ooi, T. L., & He, Z. J. (2004). Perceiving distances accurately by a directional process of integrating ground
information. Nature, 428, 73-77.
9
Syllabus—PSYC 370
M. T. Turvey
D. Investigating affordances
1. critical π–numbers, optimal π–numbers
2. role of eye height
References
Adolph. K. E. (1995). Psychophysical assessment of toddler’s ability to cope with slopes. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Perception and Performance, 21, 734-750.
Cesari, P., Formenti, F., & Olivato, P. (2003). A common perceptual parameter for stair climbing for children, young and old
adults. Human Movement Science, 22, 111-124.
Jiang, Y., & Mark, L. (1994). The effect of gap depth on the perception of whether a gap is crossable. Perception &
Psychophysics, 56, 691-700.
Lock, A., & Collett, T. (1979). A toad’s devious approach to its prey: A study of some complex uses of depth vision. Journal of
Comparative Physiology, 131, 179-189.
Mark, L. (1987). Eye height scaled information about affordances: A study of sitting and stair climbing. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 361-370.
Mark, L. S., Bailliet, J. A., Craver, K. D., Douglas, S. D., & Fox, T. (1990). What an actor must do in order to perceive the
affordance for sitting. Ecological Psychology, 2, 325-366.
Proffitt, D. R., Bhalla, M., Gossweiler, R., & Midgett, J. (1995). Perceiving geographical slant. Psychonomic Bulletin &
Review, 2, 409-428.
Warren, W.H., Jr. (1984). Perceiving affordances: Visual guidance of stair climbing. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Perception and Performance, 10, 683-703.
Warren, W.H., Jr. & Wang, S. (1987). Visual guidance of walking through apertures: Body–scaled information specifying
affordances. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 371-383.
Wraga, M. (1999). The role of eye height in perceiving affordances and object dimensions. Perception & Psychophysics, 61,
490-507.
Witt, J. K., Proffitt, D., & Epstein, W. (2004). Perceiving distance: A role of effort and intent. Perception, 33, 577-590.
E. Flow field properties and visually guided activity
1. velocity vector and deformation conceptions of optic flow
2. “efficiency” of meaning
3. significance of observer-based variables
4. insect locomotion
5. form and scope of ecological laws
References
Barwise, J. & Perry, J. (1983). Situations and attitudes. Cambridge, MA: MIT press (Chapter 1; pp. 94-100; also see figure on
p. 226!).
Duchon, A. P. & Warren, W. (2002). A visual equalization strategy for locomotor control: of honeybees, robots, and humans.
Psychological Science, 13, 272-278.
Esch, H. E., Zhang, S., Srinivasan, M. V., & Tautz, J. (2001). Honeybee dances communicate distances measured by optic
flow. Nature, 411, 581-583.
Gibson, J. J. (1950). The perception of the visual world. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (Chapters 7 and 8).
Gibson, J.J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception Boston: Houghton Mifflin.(Ch. 4 –7. 10, 12, 13).
Koenderink, J.J. (1986). Optic flow. Vision Research, 26, 166-180.
Mace, W.M. (1977). Gibson's strategy for perceiving: Ask not what's inside your head but what your head's inside of. In R.E.
Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting and knowing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McBeath, M. K., Shaffer, D. M., & Kaiser, M. K. (1995). How baseball outfielders determine where to run to catch fly balls.
Science, 268, 569-572.
McLeod, P., & Dienes, Z. (1996). Do fielders know where to go to catch a ball or only how to get there? Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 531-544.
Michaels, C. F., & Oudejans, R. D. (1992). The optics and actions of catching fly balls: Zeroing out optical acceleration.
Ecological Psychology, 4, 199-222.
Michaels, C.F. & Carello, C. (1981). Direct perception. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall (Ch. 2 and 3).
Owen, D. (1990). Lexicon of terms for the perception and control of self-motion and orientation. In R.Warren & A. H.
Wertheim (Eds.), Perception and control of self-motion (pp.33-50). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Reed, E.S. & Jones, R. (1982). Reasons for Realism. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum (Ch 1.4-1.7, .2.1, 2.3, 4.3, 4.6).
Srinivisan, M. V. (1998). Insects as Gibsonian animals. Ecological Psychology, 10, 251-270.
10
Syllabus—PSYC 370
M. T. Turvey
Turvey, M.T., Shaw, R.E., Reed, E.S., & Mace, W.M. (1981). Ecological laws of perceiving and acting: In reply to Fodor and
Pylyshyn (1981). Cognition, 9, 237-304 (Sections 6 and 7)
Warren, W. H. (1995). Self-motion: Visual perception and visual control. In W. Epstein & S. Rogers (Eds.), Perception of
space and motion (pp. 263-312). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
F. Symmetry, perceptual systems, and perception defined
1. concept of perceptual systems
2. intentionality and dynamic touch
3. task specific, smart perceptual instruments
4. perception and misperception defined
References
Carello, C. & Turvey, M. T. (2004). Physics and psychology of the muscle sense. Current Directions in Psychological Science,
13, 25-28.
Cooper, M., Carello, C., & Turvey, M. T. (2000). Perceptual independence of whole length, partial length, and hand position
in wielding a rod. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 26, 74-85.
Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin (Chpts. 2, 6, 7, 13).
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin (Chapters 9-12, 14).
Reed, E. & Jones, R. (Eds.) (1982). Reasons for realism: Selected essays of James J. Gibson. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum (3.5, 4.2,
4.4, 4.8).
Runeson, S. (1977). On the possibility of “smart” perceptual mechanisms. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 18, 172-179.
Shaw, R. E., & McIntyre, M. (1974). Algoristic foundations to cognitive psychology. In W. Weimer & D. Palermo (Eds.),
Cognition and the symbolic processes (305-362). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.
Turvey, M. T. (1996). Dynamic touch. American Psychologist, 51, 1134-1152.
Turvey, M.T., Shaw, R.E., Reed, E.S., & Mace, W.M. (1981). Ecological laws of perceiving and acting: In reply to Fodor and
Pylyshyn (1981). Cognition, 9, 237-304 (pp. 282-299).
11