Courses.2015a2230notesPrinz History
Hide minor edits - Show changes to output
Deleted lines 1-2:
'''this page is not ready yet'''
Changed lines 129-135 from:
* Comment: Can diffused attention over a large area support local object recognition?
to:
* Comment: Can diffused attention over a large area support local object recognition?
----
!!The story continues
youtube:X2sjKghOTi4
Changed line 129 from:
* Comment: Diffused attention over a large area unlikely to support local object recognition.
to:
* Comment: Can diffused attention over a large area support local object recognition?
Added lines 34-38:
Another example
* Forster, Booker, Schacter, and Davis (1990) - Unconscious perception of a word influences stem completion.
* WORD1 (eg soup) --> WORD FLASHED (eg elastic, no conscious perception) --> WORD2 (eg chess) --> TASK: complete word stem (eg ela_________)
* Flashing a word increased the likelihood of its being given as a completion, even though subjects reported not being consciously aware of it.
Added lines 48-50:
* Comments
** Is it possible that there is phenomenal consciousness but no attention in the neglect field?
** The explanation assumes the standard theory about the asymmetry of attention. Are there alternative theories?
Changed lines 118-119 from:
* Prinz: "Lamme is right that subjects are not attending selectively to each specific rectangle, but he has no grounds for saying subjects are not attending to the full assembly. And consequently, he has no grounds for saying there is consciousness without attention."
to:
* Prinz: "Lamme is right that subjects are not attending selectively to each specific rectangle, but he has no grounds for saying subjects are not attending to the full assembly. And consequently, he has no grounds for saying there is consciousness without attention."
* Comment: Diffused attention over a large area unlikely to support local object recognition.
Changed lines 61-62 from:
* Prinz : consciousness is AVAILABILITY to working memory, "located in sensory pathways"
* Baars: consciousness is ACTUALLY within working memory (in the form of global workspace)
to:
* Prinz : consciousness is information AVAILABLE to working memory, "located in sensory pathways"
* Baars: consciousness is information ACTUALLY within working memory (in the form of global workspace)
Changed line 13 from:
http://global.dstrict.com/images/projects/play_iamyou_05.jpg
to:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/259670/media/spotlight.jpg
Added line 89:
* Subjects have to report on the orientation of the stripes in a patch.
Added line 83:
* Criticism: Attention to empty space at spatial location X improves subsequent unconscious identification of object at the same location. But this does not imply attention to the object.
Changed lines 45-46 from:
* Spatial selective attention is widely considered to be right hemisphere dominant.
* Proposal: Unilateral neglect is attentional deficit. Attention necessary and sufficient for consciousness.
to:
* "Standard’ theory of neglect: Attention mechanism in right hemisphere attends to both sides; left hemisphere only controls attention to the right side.
* Proposal: Right hemisphere damage destroys attention to left side resulting in loss of visual awareness of the left visual field. Attention necessary and sufficient for consciousness.
Added line 47:
* Normal patients: TMS to attention areas in parietal cortex can induce neglect symptoms (Meister et al., 2006).
Changed line 11 from:
The spotlight theory of attention
to:
The spotlight metaphor of attention
Added lines 6-7:
http://cdn-6.spring.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/party.jpg
Added line 40:
* Contrast: Patients with blindness in left visual field might turn their heads to the left to get a full view.
Changed line 37 from:
http://www.fizyka.umk.pl/~duch/ref/00/00-how-brain/neglect.jpg
to:
http://jnnp.bmj.com/content/75/1/13/F1.medium.gif
Changed line 29 from:
to:
** Winkielman et al. (2005) - Happy faces followed by masks. "smiles caused thirsty participants to pour and consume more beverage and increased their willingness to pay and their wanting more beverage (Study 2). Subliminal frowns had the opposite effect. No feeling changes were observed, even in thirsty participants."
Changed lines 27-29 from:
* What we are conscious of: intermediate-level contents - [[Main.LOTAndNaturalLanguage|intermediate level theory of consciousness]]
to:
* ''What'' we are conscious of: intermediate-level contents - [[Main.LOTAndNaturalLanguage|intermediate level theory of consciousness]]
* But intermediate-level representations not sufficient for consciousness. Many cases of unconscious perception.
** Masking
Changed line 26 from:
* * High-level: perspective-independent objects
to:
** High-level: perspective-independent objects
Changed lines 23-25 from:
Details
* What we are conscious of
** [[Main.LOTAndNaturalLanguage|The intermediate level theory of consciousness]]
to:
* Levels of representation
** Low-level: disunified low-level features
** Intermediate: whole objects with surface details and perspectives - like a 3D movie
* * High-level: perspective-independent objects
* What we are conscious of: intermediate-level contents - [[Main.LOTAndNaturalLanguage|intermediate level theory of consciousness]]
Changed line 3 from:
'''this page is not read yet'''
to:
'''this page is not ready yet'''
Changed lines 59-62 from:
# Change blindness - Failing to notice a change shows that there is no encoding in working memory. http://sites.sinauer.com/wolfe4e/wa07.05.html
to:
# Change blindness - Failing to notice a change shows that there is no encoding in working memory.
** http://sites.sinauer.com/wolfe4e/wa07.05.html
** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38XO7ac9eSs
** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWSxSQsspiQ
Deleted lines 65-68:
Change blindness - https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/259670/media/change-blindness.jpg
[[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38XO7ac9eSs|video1]] [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWSxSQsspiQ|video2]]
Changed lines 56-59 from:
Five arguments
# Working memory encodes high-level details. Color discrimination more fine-grained than color memories.
# Visual experience too complex to be encoded in working memory.
# Change blindness - Failing notice a change shows that there is no encoding in working memory.
to:
Five arguments against Baars
# Working memory encodes high-level content. Content of consciousness more fine-grained. Color discrimination (1 million colors) more fine-grained than color memories (11-16).
# Visual experience too complex to be encoded in working memory which has limited capacity.
# Change blindness - Failing to notice a change shows that there is no encoding in working memory. http://sites.sinauer.com/wolfe4e/wa07.05.html
Added line 108:
* "it seems implausible that any subjects were attending, except perhaps by chance, to the rectangle that was" later being pointed at. The subjects' performance suggests that the rectangle was consciously perceived in the first display.
Added lines 80-84:
* Prinz's response: Better performance due to changes in microsaccades, not attention.
** Attentional focus need not be the same as gaze direction.
* Convincing? Maybe spontaneous microsaccades do reflect changes in attentional focus here.
* It is possible that attention is necessary but not sufficient.
Changed lines 43-44 from:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vyDtoJL2Gc
to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MH6ZSfhdIuM
Changed lines 47-49 from:
[[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo|YouTube video]]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vyDtoJL2Gc
to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo
Added lines 29-30:
!!Three lines of evidence
Changed lines 41-49 from:
Inattentional blindness - [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo|YouTube video]]
to:
!!!Attentional blink
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vyDtoJL2Gc
!!!Inattentional blindness
[[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo|YouTube video]]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vyDtoJL2Gc
Added lines 39-40:
Inattentional blindness - [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo|YouTube video]]
Deleted line 54:
Inattentional blindness - [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo|YouTube video]]
Added line 33:
* Unilateral neglect is usually caused by right hemisphere damage from stroke (right inferior parietal cortex). Seems to lack conscious experience of left visual field.
Added lines 36-37:
* Spatial selective attention is widely considered to be right hemisphere dominant.
* Proposal: Unilateral neglect is attentional deficit. Attention necessary and sufficient for consciousness.
Changed lines 26-28 from:
* Contrast with Baars (1988) Global Workspace Theory
** Prinz : consciousness is AVAILABILITY to working memory, "located in sensory pathways"
** Baars: consciousness is ACTUALLY within working memory (in the form of global workspace)
to:
----
!!!Unilateral neglect
http://www.fizyka.umk.pl/~duch/ref/00/00-how-brain/neglect.jpg
* Unconscious perception in unilateral neglect: "Marshall and Halligan (1988) presented a neglect patient with two vertically aligned pictures of houses that were exactly the same except one of them had flames shooting out on the left. The patient insisted that the houses were the same, but when asked which one she would rather live in, she chose the one without flames on 9 out of 11 trials."
* Activations include intermediate level visual areas, but not sufficient for consciousness.
----
!!!Comparison with Baars (1988) Global Workspace Theory
* Prinz : consciousness is AVAILABILITY to working memory, "located in sensory pathways"
* Baars: consciousness is ACTUALLY within working memory (in the form of global workspace)
Added line 41:
[[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38XO7ac9eSs|video1]] [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWSxSQsspiQ|video2]]
Changed lines 14-17 from:
!!What we are conscious of
[[Main.LOTAndNaturalLanguage|The intermediate level theory of consciousness]]
to:
Changed lines 23-25 from:
Contrast with Baars (1988) Global Workspace Theory
* Prinz : consciousness is AVAILABILITY to working memory, "located in sensory pathways"
* Baars: consciousness is ACTUALLY within working memory (in the form of global workspace)
to:
Details
* What we are conscious of
** [[Main.LOTAndNaturalLanguage|The intermediate level theory of consciousness]]
* Contrast with Baars (1988) Global Workspace Theory
** Prinz : consciousness is AVAILABILITY to working memory, "located in sensory pathways"
** Baars: consciousness is ACTUALLY within working memory (in the form of global workspace)
Changed lines 27-28 from:
to:
* Prinz : consciousness is AVAILABILITY to working memory, "located in sensory pathways"
* Baars: consciousness is ACTUALLY within working memory (in the form of global workspace)
Five arguments
# Working memory encodes high-level details. Color discrimination more fine-grained than color memories.
# Visual experience too complex to be encoded in working memory.
# Change blindness - Failing to notice a change shows that there is no encoding in working memory.
# Subliminal perception - Consciously aware of a stimulus but not knowing what it was vs. aware and being able to report. The latter involves encoding in working memory.
# Hasson et al. (2004) - Watching a movie "showed no significant response in frontal areas".
Added line 13:
* Attention associated with [[https://visualizedd.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/popout001.jpg|pop-out]], [[https://rememberingletters.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/usa-z-card-puzzle.jpg|search]], selection
Changed line 31 from:
to:
Change blindness - https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/259670/media/change-blindness.jpg
Changed line 27 from:
to:
Added lines 22-25:
@@@Consciousness arises when and only when intermediate-level representations undergo changes that allow them to become available to working memory.@@@
Contrast with Baars (1988) Global Workspace Theory
Changed lines 19-20 from:
to:
!!The AIR theory (Attended Intermediate-level Representation)
@@@Consciousness arises when and only when intermediate-level representations are modulated by attention.@@@
Changed line 26 from:
to:
Changed line 24 from:
to:
Inattentional blindness - [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo|YouTube video]]
Added lines 8-11:
The spotlight theory of attention
http://global.dstrict.com/images/projects/play_iamyou_05.jpg
Added lines 4-7:
!!Attention
@@@Every one knows what attention is. It is the taking possession by the mind, in clear and vivid form, of one out of what seem several simultaneously possible objects or trains of thought. . It implies withdrawal from some things in order to deal effectively with others.^^^William James (1890)@@@
Added lines 54-55:
* Prinz: "Lamme is right that subjects are not attending selectively to each specific rectangle, but he has no grounds for saying subjects are not attending to the full assembly. And consequently, he has no grounds for saying there is consciousness without attention."
Changed line 51 from:
to:
Added line 53:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/259670/media/lamme-2003.jpg
Added lines 28-32:
!!!Jiang (2006)
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/259670/media/jiang-2006.jpg
Added line 27:
* Setup: "They presented GY with an arrow in the center of a screen, followed by either a vertical or horizontal line in one of two locations in his blind visual field. The arrows were visible to him, but the oriented lines were not. At a tone, GY had to guess the orientation of the line he could not see. Kentridge et al. found that his accuracy increased if the line was located in the direction that the arrow was pointing. They concluded that the arrow leads GY to direct attention within his blind field, and it is that attention that facilitates performance. Thus, attention seems to be possible in the absence of consciousness."
Changed lines 23-24 from:
to:
!!!Kentridge (2004) on GY
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/259670/media/kentridge-2004.jpg
Changed line 38 from:
to:
Added lines 16-18:
Added lines 39-41:
* Experiment: "Subjects do not report having clear experiences of the faces, but they do seem to experience something when the faces are flashed. This looks like conscious perception without attention"
* Prinz: But maybe there is some residual attention? Faces tend to pop-out in visual perception and so may capture some amount of attention.
Added line 35:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/259670/media/reddy-2006.jpg
Changed lines 26-27 from:
!!!Koch: attention not necessary in ganzfeld perception
to:
!!!1. Koch: attention not necessary in ganzfeld perception
Changed lines 33-36 from:
to:
Added lines 9-10:
Added lines 16-17:
Added lines 21-22:
Added lines 22-26:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a9/Ganzfeld.jpg
* Koch: Visual awareness is present during perception of a ganzfeld, but attention is not engaged because there is nothing in the visual field that requires selective attention.
* Prinz: Attention can still be deployed, in scanning different parts of the visual field.
Added line 28:
Changed lines 5-25 from:
[[Main.LOTAndNaturalLanguage|The intermediate level theory of consciousness]]
to:
!!What we are conscious of
[[Main.LOTAndNaturalLanguage|The intermediate level theory of consciousness]]
!!The AIR theory
!!Evidence
!!Objections: attention not sufficient
!!!Kentridge on GY
!!Objections: attention not necessary
!!!Koch: attention not necessary in ganzfeld perception
!!!Reddy
!!!Lamme
Added lines 1-5:
!Prinz on attention and consciousness
'''this page is not read yet'''
[[Main.LOTAndNaturalLanguage|The intermediate level theory of consciousness]]