David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):626-628 (2001)
Roger Shepard's proposals and supporting experiments concerning evolutionary internalized regularities have been very influential in the study of vision and in other areas of psychology and cognitive science. This paper examines issues concerning the need, nature, explanatory role, and justification for postulating such internalized constraints. In particular, I seek further clarification from Shepard on how best to understand his claim that principles of kinematic geometry underlie phenomena of motion perception. My primary focus is on the ecological validity of Shepard's kinematic constraint in the context of ordinary motion perception. First, I explore the analogy Shepard draws between internalized circadian rhythms and the supposed internalization of kinematic geometry. Next, questions are raised about how to interpret and justify applying results from his own and others' experimental studies of apparent motion to more everyday cases of motion perception in richer environments. Finally, some difficulties with Shepard's account of the evolutionary development of his kinematic constraint are considered. Key Words: apparent motion; circadian rhythms; constraints; ecological validity; evolution; internalizated regularities; kinematic principle.
|Keywords||apparent motion circadian rhythms constraints ecological validity evolution internalizated regularities kinematic principle|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
William C. Hoffman (2001). Group Theory and Geometric Psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):674-676.
Rainer Mausfeld (2001). What's Within? Can the Internal Structure of Perception Be Derived From Regularities of the External World? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):689-690.
Dejan Todorovic (2001). Measurement Theory is a Poor Model of the Relation of Kinematic Geometry and Perception of Motion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):705-706.
Horace Barlow (2001). The Exploitation of Regularities in the Environment by the Brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):602-607.
Heiko Hecht (2001). Regularities of the Physical World and the Absence of Their Internalization. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):608-617.
Helene Intraub (2001). Internalized Constraints in the Representation of Spatial Layout. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):677-678.
Dennis Lomas (2001). Representation of Basic Kinds: Not a Case of Evolutionary Internalization of Universal Regularities. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):686-687.
Horst Krist (2001). The Internalization of Physical Constraints From a Developmental Perspective. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):681-682.
Michael Kubovy & William Epstein (2001). Internalization: A Metaphor We Can Live Without. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):618-625.
Dejan Todorovic (2001). Is Kinematic Geometry an Internalized Regularity? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):641-651.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #235,887 of 1,096,391 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #224,935 of 1,096,391 )
How can I increase my downloads?