David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Although disoriented young children reorient themselves in relation to the shape of the surrounding surface layout, cognitive accounts of this ability vary. The present paper tests three theories of reorientation: a snapshot theory based on visual image-matching computations, an adaptive combination theory proposing that diverse environmental cues to orientation are weighted according to their experienced reliability, and a modular theory centering on encapsulated computations of the shape of the extended surface layout. Seven experiments test these theories by manipulating four properties of objects placed within a cylindrical space: their size, motion, dimensionality, and distance from the space’s borders. Their ﬁndings support the modular theory and suggest that disoriented search behavior centers on two processes: a reorientation process based on the geometry of the 3D surface layout, and a beacon-guidance process based on the local features of objects and surface markings. Ó 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Sang Ah Lee & Elizabeth S. Spelke, Young Children Reorient by Computing Layout Geometry, Not by Matching Images of the Environment.
Alexandra D. Twyman & Nora S. Newcombe (2010). Five Reasons to Doubt the Existence of a Geometric Module. Cognitive Science 34 (7):1315-1356.
Rachel Keen & Elizabeth S. Spelke, Young Children's Representations of Spatial and Functional Relations Between Objects.
Richard Samuels (2002). The Spatial Reorientation Data Do Not Support the Thesis That Language is the Medium of Cross-Modular Thought. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):697-698.
Eric Mandelbaum (2013). Numerical Architecture. Topics in Cognitive Science 5 (1):367-386.
Michael K. Cundall (2006). Rethinking the Divide: Modules and Central Systems. Philosophia 34 (4):379-393.
Thierry Ripoll (1998). Why This Makes Me Think of That. Thinking and Reasoning 4 (1):15 – 43.
Axel Barceló Aspeitia, Ángeles Eraña & Robert Stainton (2010). The Contribution of Domain Specificity in the Highly Modular Mind. Minds and Machines 20 (1):19-27.
Ludomir Newelski (2002). Modular Types in Some Supersimple Theories. Journal of Symbolic Logic 67 (4):1601-1615.
Axel Arturo Barceló Aspeitia, Ángeles Eraña & Robert Stainton (2010). The Contribution of Domain Specificity in the Highly Modular Mind. Minds and Machines 20 (1):19-27.
Peter Bradley (2008). Constancy, Categories and Bayes: A New Approach to Representational Theories of Color Constancy. Philosophical Psychology 21 (5):601 – 627.
Thomas V. Papathomas (1999). Is Perception of 3-D Surface Configurations Cognitively Penetrable? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (3):388-389.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads1 ( #301,668 of 1,008,729 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?