Part 1

For this Discussion, consider differences between bottom-up and top-down perception.

With these thoughts in mind:

Post a brief explanation of the active nature of perception. Then explain two differences between bottom-up and top-down perception. Finally, provide one example of how everyday experience would be altered if bottom-up perception were impaired, as well as one example of how everyday experience would be altered if top-down perception were impaired. (500 words or more)

Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources.

Part 2

In this Discussion, think about theories of attention as well as cultural and social variables. Consider the relationship between all of these factors and cognition.

With these thoughts in mind:

Post a brief comparison of one early theory of attention to the Guided Search theory of attention. Then describe how these theories apply to visual search. Finally, describe one cultural and one social variable that might influence attention and explain how. (500 words or more)

Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources.

READINGS

  • de la Rosa, S., Choudhery, R. N., & Chatziastros, A. (2011). Visual object detection, categorization, and identification tasks are associated with different time courses and sensitivities. Human Perception and Performance37(1), 38–47.
    Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
  • DeGloma, T., & Friedman, A. (2005). Thinking with socio-mental filters: Exploring the social structuring of attention and significance. Conference Papers––American Sociological Association, 1–24.
    Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
  • Proulx, M. J. (2007). Bottom-up guidance in visual search for conjunctions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance33(1), 48–56.
    Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
  • Wolfe, J. M., & Horowitz, T. S. (2004). What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? Nature Reviews Neuroscience5(6), 495–501.
    Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
  • Geisler, W. S. (2008). Visual perception and the statistical properties of natural scenesAnnual Review of Psychology, 59, 167–192.
    Geisler, W. S. Visual Perception and the Statistical Properties of Natural Sciences. Annual Review of Psychology. Copyright 2007 Annual Reviews, Inc. Used with permission from Annual Reviews, Inc. via the Copyright Clearance Center.
  • Peissig, J. J., & Tarr, M. J. (2007). Visual object recognition: Do we know more now than we did 20 years agoAnnual Review of Psychology58, 75–96.
    Peissig, J.J., & Tarr, M.J., Visual object recognition: do we know more now than we did 20 years ago? Annual Review of Psychology. Copyright 2007 Annual Reviews, Inc. Used with permission from Annual Reviews, Inc. via the Copyright Clearance Center.
  • Posner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (2007). Research on attention networks as a model for the integration of psychological scienceAnnual Review of Psychology58, 1–23.
    Research on attention networks as a model for the integration of psychological science by Posner, M.I., & Rothbart, M.K. in Annual Review of Psychology, 58. Copyright 2008 by Annual Reviews, Inc. Reprinted by permission of Annual Reviews, Inc., via the Copyright Clearance Center.