I’m going to have to read this. I’ve been studying foreground/background stuff for a while and the background view is handled differently (it’s constructed) than foreground As mine is fundamentally screwed up (I have to construct my background constantly because of the ADHD/ anxiety combo which keeps it shook up), it is an ongoing fascination how we construct reality on the fly and how our body / brain helps

I’m going to have to read this. I’ve been studying foreground/background stuff for a while and the background view is handled differently (it’s constructed) than foreground
As mine is fundamentally screwed up (I have to construct my background constantly because of the ADHD/ anxiety combo which keeps it shook up), it is an ongoing fascination how we construct reality on the fly and how our body / brain helps
ah good good: they address the traditional explanations:“The most common modern explanations for the appearance of object stability revolve around some form of change blindness (3–5) or inattentional blindness (6, 7), in which the capacity limits of visual short-term memory (8, 9) prevent us from being aware of things that change.”I was never satisfied with those explanations completely although I accepted them. Hopefully this one can give the missing parts. Fingers crossed.
Oh I’m loving it Jes. It’s addressing EXACTLY my problem with change blindness.
“Change blindness explanations make no predictions about an ongoing misrecognition of attended objects at each moment in time. Here, we show that the online appearance of a single physically changing object can be made to seem stable through an active mechanism of perceptual serial dependence.”
Something can be changing right in front of you and you might not be able to see it as the near memory of an imaginary unchanged form pulls you back towards it, the object-ness being a state your mind prefers (we have limited cognitive capacities to handle all the uniqueness of the everythings and the alls)
—-
 https://www.mauromanassi.com/stability-illusion the movie they used. They did a fantastic job checking for alternative explanations; I don’t know about any screening for aspergers/autism or other conditions that might predispose one to face-blindness — the use of a face’s apparent age as a sample for continual serial dependence change from someone who has some trouble with faces (me) makes me question that a little — but I like that they did a “one shot” take of the video to prevent memory effects at least. Not done with the paper yet but almost. Enjoying it.
==
I was close – I guessed a few extra years than was true
. They gave me enough time to set an age in my age at the start on the video so that when they started changing it, i could see it as it was changing.
But this is after having read the paper so it wasn’t with an entirely clear head either. Lab science is tricky stuff.
===
 Thank you Jes. I also like looking at other papers by an author to see what their expertise is: sometimes an author pontificates outside of their expertise or conversely they publish many papers to prove a single point, which is of course the legacy of many a scientist and of course both are needed (as interdisciplinary work has revealed many previously unseen connections).

In another paper by the main author, the topic is visual crowding and multilevel identification of objects Right up my alley. The main author alone will keep me busy for a bit. Good stuff.

====

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


4 × = twenty four

Leave a Reply