PERCEPTION
The brain’s interpretation of stimuli informs perception. Two theoretical approaches to perception include bottom-up and top-down perception.
Bottom-up perception describes the perception of stimuli based on concrete characteristics. Top-down perception describes perception of external stimuli based on prior knowledge about their properties. Cognitive psychologists study how and when individuals employ these two types of perception to determine their significance and to shed light on human experiences of the world.
For this Discussion, consider differences between bottom-up and top-down perception.
RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
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.
Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources.
RESOURCES/REFERENCES
- 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 PerformanceLinks to an external site., 37(1), 38–47.
- DeGloma, T., & Friedman, A. (2005). Thinking with socio-mental filters: Exploring the social structuring of attention and significance. Conference Papers––American Sociological AssociationLinks to an external site., 1–24.
- Proulx, M. J. (2007). Bottom-up guidance in visual search for conjunctions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and PerformanceLinks to an external site., 33(1), 48–56.
- Wolfe, J. M., & Horowitz, T. S. (2004). What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? Nature Reviews NeuroscienceLinks to an external site., 5(6), 495–501.
- Geisler, W. S. (2008). Visual perception and the statistical properties of natural scenes. Annual Review of Psychology Download Annual 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 ago? Annual Review of Psychology Download Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 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 science. Annual Review of Psychology Download Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 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.
