Scanning and rotation evidence is problematic

Kosslyn's experimental results may be invalid as: 1) subjects' tacit knowledge of real objects makes them think they are supposed to work with images in the same way they work with real objects, and 2) The experimenter is able to affect the results.

Kosslyn's experimental results may be invalid as:

  • Subjects' tacit knowledge of real objects makes them think that they are supposed to work with images in the same way that they work with real objects. As a result, subjects are not literally scanning or rotating images, but are mentally simulating a real scanning or rotation of a real object. That is, the task demands of the experiment confound its results.
  • The experimenter is able to affect the subject with "non-verbal cues, tacit messages... loaded answers to questions and so on" (p.544). This gives rise to a variety of undesirable experimenter affects.
Charles L. Richman, David B. Mitchell, and J. Steven Reznick (1979)—as articulated by Zenon Pylyshyn (1981).
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Can computers think? [1]
No: computers can't understand images [5b]
Images represented by filled cells in an array
Images are Quasi-pictorial representations
Image Psychology
Experimental evidence
Behavioural evidence
Scanning and rotation evidence is problematic
Alleged problems have been disconfirmed
Mental Rotation
Scanning visual images
Behavioural evidence inconclusive
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip