Do young children reverse ambiguous figures?

I Rock; A Gopnik; S Hall

doi:10.1068/p230635

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 7845757

Do young children reverse ambiguous figures?

I Rock·A Gopnik·S Hall

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Most adult observers tend not to reverse ambiguous figures if they are not informed about the ambiguity of the figure. The question was asked whether very young children who have rarely, if ever, seen any kinds of ambiguous figures will reverse if uninformed, and also how they will behave if they are informed. It was found that 3 and 4 year olds never reverse when presented with two different kinds of ambiguous figures when uninformed, and only some do even when informed; further, those that do reverse do so only once or twice over a 60 s inspection period. These results are interpreted as further confirmation of an earlier finding with adults--that reversal is not simply a matter of prolonged inspection of an ambiguous figure leading automatically to neural satiation. Instead, cognitive factors such as utilization of memory and intention are implicated.

Explore related subjects

Attention Awareness Child Development Child, Preschool Discrimination Learning Female Humans Knowledge of Results, Psychological Male Mental Recall Optical Illusions Pattern Recognition, Visual Psychophysics Reference Values Reversal Learning Journal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

I Rock, A Gopnik, S Hall. 1994. Do young children reverse ambiguous figures?. https://doi.org/10.1068/p230635

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1998

On the role of selective attention in visual perception.

What is the role of selective attention in visual perception? Before answering this question, it is necessary to differentiate between attentional mechanisms that influence the identification of a stimulus from those that operate after perception is complete. Cognitive neuroscience techniques are particularly well suited to making this distinction because they allow different attentional mechanisms to be isolated in terms of timing and/or neuroanatomy. The present article describes the use of these techniques in differentiating between perceptual and postperceptual attentional mechanisms and then proposes a specific role of attention in visual perception. Specifically, attention is proposed to resolve ambiguities in neural coding that arise when multiple objects are processed simultaneously. Evidence for this hypothesis is provided by two experiments showing that attention-as measured electrophysiologically-is allocated to visual search targets only under conditions that would be expected to lead to ambiguous neural coding.

Attention↗

PubMed1998

Letter recognition reveals pathways of second-order and third-order motion.

How are second-order (texture-defined) and third-order (pattern-tracking) motions processed in our brains? As shown here in the context of an ambiguous motion task involving a nominal second-order stimuli first devised by Werkhoven et al., [Werkhoven, P., Sperling, G. & Chubb, C. (1993) Vision Res. 33, 463-485.], the observers fell into two distinct groups based on the direction of perceived motion. The differences were interpreted in terms of the algorithms used to extract motion: one group by using a second-order motion process and the other by using a third-order motion process. This was investigated further using a dual-task paradigm in which the interference between two tasks indicated the nature of processing involved. Observers who used third-order motion processing experienced interference with letter recognition and a more severe interference in dual third-order motion tasks. Observers who used second-order motion processing experienced interference with another second-order motion detection but not with letter recognition. Insofar as task interference implies the need for attention, the complex interference effects and the apparently paradoxical interference effects of second-order motion perception imply that there are multiple forms of attention. Whether two tasks interfere depends on whether they require the same form of attention. Insofar as spatio-temporal processing is assumed to be carried out in the dorsal stream and pattern recognition in the ventral stream, the interference patterns suggest that second-order motion may be computed entirely in the dorsal stream, and third-order motion may involve two computational processes, one of which shares computational resources with the letter recognition task in the ventral stream.

Attention↗

PubMed1998

The missing link: the role of interhemispheric interaction in attentional processing.

Although interhemispheric interaction via the callosum is most often conceived as a mechanism for transferring sensory information and coordinating processing between the hemispheres, it will be argued here that the callosum also plays an important role in attentional processing. Experiments will be presented that support this viewpoint, both when attention is conceptualized as a resource and when it is conceptualized as a selective mechanism for gating sensory information. Interhemispheric interaction is posited to aid attentional processing because it allows for a division of labor across the hemispheres, and allows for parallel processing so that operations performed in one hemisphere can be insulated from those executed in the other. Given this additional role for interhemispheric processing, it is suggested that the corpus callosum should be considered a component in the network of neural structures that underlie attentional control.

Attention↗