The Rubber Hand Illusion: Is Seeing Believing?

The Rubber Hand Illusion: Is Seeing Believing?
This video demonstrates bottom up perception overriding top down knowledge. Initially, the participants had top down knowledge that the rubber hand was not their hand. Although the rubber hand looks similar to a real hand, it is clear the rubber hand is not a real hand. As the participants' real hand (that was hidden) and the rubber hand (not hidden) began being stimulated simultaneously, the participants' bottom up perception overrode their top down knowledge, and felt the rubber hand was their real hand. This was evident when the hammer hit the rubber hand and the participants reacted as if the hammer was hitting their real hand. This illusion demonstrates how our senses have the ability to deceive us, showing that seeing should not necessarily lead to believing.

Comments

Negative Afterimage

Reber Shukri Professor Vaughn Negative afterimage is a stimulus which elicits a positive image. In order to experience this, one can look at a bright source of light and then look away to a dark area. The way negative afterimage works is when the eye's photo-receptors which are the rods and cones adapt to over stimulation and lose sensitivity. The photo-receptors which are constantly exposed to the same stimulus will fatigue their supply of photo pigment, resulting a decrease in signal to the brain. The way negative afterimage connects to perception is because of bottom up processing where the stimulus influences what we perceive. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szy8iNCljlQ <Link to the video

Illusions that Confuse Multiple Senses

In this video, several illusions are shown that deceive your senses. Illusions such as the Zöllner Illusion and the Poggendorff illusion confuse our bottom up processing by tricking our vision. However, our vision isn't the only sense that these illusions can confuse, blind individuals presented with raised versions of the same illusions are also confused by them. These illusions effect the visual and touch systems by confusing our bottom up processing by tricking out sight and touch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Je1mkzRU5rc&t=64s

Evolution of Camouflage & First World War Dazzle Paint Jobs The origins of modern camouflage owes itself to 19th century naturalist painters. The most notable of these in the development of knowledge of camouflage was Abbot H, Thayer. While he harbored some strange views of the scientific development of animal camouflage (all animals were "camouflaged") He noticed the effect of disruptive patterning and countershading. He noted that animal markings tended to obstruct their shape in nature. Their coloring added with this made them often completely invisible. By going from darker shades on top to lighter on the bottom animals canceled out the way we see objects by light illuminated them top down. Black also aided in disruptive schemes. An example of Countershading. Abbot's demonstration of disruptive patterns. In this image we can see how disruptive patterns observe...

Philosophy of Perception

Search This Blog