Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):679-680 (2001)
|Abstract||We argue four points. First, perception always relies on environmental constraints, not only in special cases. Second, constraints are taken advantage of by detecting information granted by the constraints rather than by internalizing them. Third, apparent motion phenomena reveal reliance on constraints that are irrelevant in everyday perception. Fourth, constraints are selected through individual learning as well as evolution. The “perceptual-concept-of-velocity” phenomenon is featured as a relevant case. [Hecht; Kubovy & Epstein; Shepard].|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Robert L. Goldstone & David Landy (2010). Domain-Creating Constraints. Cognitive Science 34 (7):1357-1377.
Robert Schwartz (2001). Evolutionary Internalized Regularities. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):626-628.
Thomas Nickles (1978). Scientific Problems and Constraints. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1978:134 - 148.
Martti Kuokkanen (1993). Structuralist Constraints and Mathematical Social Theorizing. Erkenntnis 38 (3):351 - 370.
Arthur Merin, Unthinkable Syndromes. Paradoxa of Relevance and Constraints on Diagnostic Categories.
Robert Stalnaker (2009). Iterated Belief Revision. Erkenntnis 70 (2):189 - 209.
Sverker Runeson, David M. Jacobs, Isabell E. K. Andersson & Kairi Kreegipuu (2001). Specificity is Always Contingent on Constraints: Global Versus Individual Arrays is Not the Issue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (2):240-241.
Dan Klein & Christopher D. Manning, From Instance-Level Constraints to Space-Level Constraints: Making the Most of Prior Knowledge in Data Clustering.
James L. Dannemiller & William Epstein (1999). Constraining the Use of Constraints. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (3):373-374.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #160,368 of 549,087 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?