PSYC 339 WEEK 5
PSYC 339 WEEK 5 PSYC 339
Popular in Origins of the Mind
verified elite notetaker
Popular in PSYC
This 4 page Class Notes was uploaded by Isaac Lemus on Friday September 23, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PSYC 339 at University of Southern California taught by Justin Wood in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 13 views. For similar materials see Origins of the Mind in PSYC at University of Southern California.
Reviews for PSYC 339 WEEK 5
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 09/23/16
Lecture Notes 8/20: Objects 2 ● Quick discussion of the exam ○ Entirely multiple choice questions ■ There can be multiple answers for a single question. You get a point for every answer you get right, minus a point for every answer you get wrong, and no points for anything left blank. There will be at least one right answer. ■ Focus heavily on the lecture notes. Look at the main conclusion, then focus on the specifics of each slide. ■ Just skim the outside readings, he won't ask about specifics of the readings ■ No questions from materials on lab ■ Covers first 10 lectures and there will be 50 questions ● Back to our lectures: Objects can act like thought’s currency. We need to think about objects in order to read, write, draw, work, speak, etc. Remember from last time that we have two systems for object formation ○ Tracking system ■ It doesn’t care what objects are or where they came from it just cares about spatiotemporal information. Following the motion of cubes for example ○ Recognition system ■ This is how we recognize our ability to pick up specific objects through shape size color ● So for now let's look at tracking systems and its four signatures ■ 3 to 4 things can be tracked at once ■ We can track things even when they go out of view momentarily ■ Tracking occurs over entire object not just parts ■ Only works for concrete objects not something fluid or nonrigid ○ When examining these systems we’ll try to also answer if they support innate or empiricist perspectives. ● Lets first look at how do babies deal with objects from birth onwards? ○ From 01 months there is no responsiveness to objects ○ From 14 months focuses on objects but they aren’t able to grab or motion for them yet ○ From 48 months they reach for objects only when they are in sight, no object permanence ○ From 812 months they start searching but only in a fixed location. classic ‘A not B area’ phenomenon ○ From 1218 months they make errors when the change is invisible. They think that the object must be in the last place where they saw it ● Piaget's proposed an empiricist perspective saying that babies go from only being able to intake visual information to developing the skills listed above. Stems from the coordination of action. Not an innate mechanism. Called a Copernican revolution. ○ Was he right? ■ As of right now it’s 50% a 50% split in support ○ But to fully answer this we have to face these problems ■ Maybe the problem is their motor system not mental capacity ■ Maybe they just don’t have a good memory ● So to answer this we need to find a way to find out what a baby thinks without having to rely on their actions. ● Gestalt psychology, we create the easiest way of organization and interpretation ○ This trait is apparent in adults, so what about babies? ○ To test this, we create a habituation to a triangle with a block in the middle then show them two new triangles, one fully complete, the other missing the edges where the block use to be. If they already assumed the triangle was complete under the block (like adults) they’ll stare at the broken triangle longer. ■ They end up looking equally long at both. There is no establishment of an expectation ○ What happens when we add movement? ■ Massive responsive to broken object, they see that as new. Meaning they establish a representation to a single object ○ Take away, babies don't have the gestalt principle and instead focus on spatial temporal information ■ Another example: Duck on a truck. The babies learn to associate the duck and truck as one object because they move together. ■ What babies do is what blind people do who regain their vision, they rely on tracking and movement information. ● So if it exists in a baby brain and blind people, it should exist in adults ○ Change in rings. Even though the rate of change stays the same, when there is motion added, our minds want to create as sense of stability. Things that move overpower our tracking of color and shapes. ● Now, let's look at monkeys ○ Tunnel effect illusion. Monkeys search for only one of the fruits because they think it’s just one fruit. Even though the fruit changes color and shape, the continuous motion overpowered their other system. ● So animals, babies, and other humans, do they have the same systems of this mechanism? ○ 3 to 4 tracking system ■ babies can tell 1 vs 2, 2 vs 3, but not 3 vs 4. (grahm crackers) ■ Monkeys get 1vs2, 2vs3, and 3 vs 4 but not 4 vs 5 (fruit) ■ Salamanders get 2 vs 3 (flies) ■ Fish get 3 vs 4 (fish food) ○ We can still represent things that disappear from view ■ Babies will look at the other edge of a blockage waiting for the object to reappear only when the objects disappears along an edge. ○ We track a whole object rather than its parts ■ Breaking an object into two, babies perform at chance level and their ability to keep track of an object ○ Cohesin ■ Babies can’t track things that pour, like the sand experiment. They can only track things that are rigid. ● So humans babies have the same systems and signatures as adults. ● Chick study with imprinted objects also shows that these traits are innate! ○ Object permanence task, mom is covered, yet they still fond her. ○ Chicks only develop object permanence when the object runs smoothly. So they have it early on but it's still learned. ● In conclusion, infants have the same signature as adults, and so do other animals suggesting that this is a core feature that seems to require visual experience with smooth and slow natural movement Lecture Notes 8/22: Objects 3 ● Review: main question is how do we represent objects? ○ Is it built in or is it learned? ○ Two object representation systems ■ Tracking ■ Recognition ○ In the first lecture we talked about the four object representation systems for tracking ● Now it’s time to focus on the four systems of object recognition ○ We focus on color and shape ○ We focus on perceived shape as opposed to physical shape ○ We focus on non accidental properties ○ We classify objects into kinds or categories. ● When it comes to color to shape, we can turn to illusions ○ The box with a stick illusion and the illusion where we see flat drawn objects as 3D shows how we build our information of our colors and shape. We perceive connecting lines as edges and use color to form sides. ● Mature species use non accidental properties. We focus more when a shape edges change from straight to curved rather than from curved to more curved. By looking at examples of Expansion, Curvature in and out, Curvature of shape direction we see that even though two blocks are equally different from the middle block, we sense that the straight block is the outlier. We are more honed in on shifts from straight to curved ○ Are these views shared with everyone? Is it generalizable across all humans? ○ Studied Himba in Northwestern Namibia ○ RESULTS: very similar to us, sensitive to non accidental error rather than metric change. ○ Even though they have different visual inputs they have the same abilities ○ Also adult pigeons and monkeys have these characteristics ○ Widely shared across the animal kingdom ● What about newborns? When can they use color information to perceive objects ■ At 4 months they can distinguish shape ■ 7 months they can distinguish patterns ■ 12 months distinguish color ■ Helps both sides ■ Empiricist : they learned it and gets better or time ■ Nativist: Maintained in the brain until hooks up get developed ● Babies are hard to test: so let’s go to new born chicks ○ Imprinting: In a lab we can ask, what are the things that matter, what doesn’t ■ Color; they can recognize change in shape and color above chance level ■ Perception: They go by perceived shape not by physical shape. They can do this across background changes. Even though the shape they printed to might have changed positions they still know to follow that shape rather than a different shape that is in a similar position as the original shape. ● So they can recognize even in Abstract, view invariant, and across different backgrounds ○ Point for nativism ○ But maybe experience with the natural world is needed. Our world is based off of slow and smooth aspects ○ To test this we raised chicks in more and more absurd worlds (Non smooth and quickly) ■ As the world become less and less smooth it breaks their capacity to process of recognition. ■ For speed, the quicker, the less they can recognize ■ Therefore you need to be in the sweet spot of a slow and smooth world ○ Same results in adult monkeys and artificial intelligence ● Now do animals recognize objects in kinds of things ○ Monkeys using tools and throwing rocks (weapons and tools) ○ Birds use tools and have fun (fun and tools) ● What about robots? ○ Simple set of computations that filters, thresholds, pools ,and normalizes through repeated layers. We create the same set of systems in them to look for ● All in all, it is clear that we have these four signatures for recognition. ○ Non human animals have the same signature ○ Emerge universally and rapidly, across different cultures ○ Learned from experience, but we have to build from some powerful inherent mechanisms ○ Both nativist and empiricist are right for this one!
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'