Are ambiguous figures actually ambivalent?

Individual Differences Research

Volumn 3, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 162-170

  Lassiter, G Daniel ^a   Geers, Andrew L ^b  

^a OHIO UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 44649084971     PISSN: 1541745X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Binder, A., & Feldman, S. E. (1960). The effect of experimentally controlled experience upon recognition responses, Psychology Monographs, No. 496.
2. Bernstein, L. J., & Cooper, L. A. (1997). Direction of motion influences perceptual identification of ambiguous figures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 721-737.
3. Bruner, J. S., & Minturn, A. L. (1955). Perceptual identification and perceptual organization. Journal of General Psychology, 53, 21-28.
4. Bruner, J. S., & Potter, M. C. (1964). Interference in visual recognition. Science, 144, 424-425.
5. Bugelski, B. R., & Alampay, D. A. (1961). The role of frequency in developing perceptual sets. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 15, 205-211.
6. Chastain, G., Burnham, C. A. (1975). The first glimpse determines the perception of an ambiguous figure. Perception and Psychophysics, 17, 221-224.
7. Georgiades, M. S., & Harris, J. P. (1997). Biasing effects in ambiguous figures: Removal or fixation of critical features can affect perception. Visual Cognition, 4, 383-408.
8. Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
9. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
10. Goolkasian, P. (1987). Ambiguous figures: Role of context and critical features. Journal of General Psychology, 114, 217-228.
11. Goolkasian, P. (1991). The effect of size on the perception of ambiguous figures. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 29, 161-164.
12. Gregory, R. L. (1970). The intelligent eye. New York: McGraw-Hill.
13. Hochberg, J. (1968). In the mind's eye. In R. N. Haber (Ed.), Contemporary theory and research in visual perception (pp. 309-331). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
14. Hochberg, J.. & Peterson, M. A. (1987). Piecemeal perception and cognitive components in object perception: Perceptually coupled responses to moving objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 370-380.
15. Kleinschmidt, A., Büchel, C., Zeki, S., & Frackowiak, R. S. J. (1998). Human brain activity during spontaneously reversing perception of ambiguous figures. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 265, 2427-2433.
16. Leeper, R. W. (1935). A study of a neglected portion of the field of learning - The development of sensory organization. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 46, 41-75.
17. McArthur, L. A., & Baron, R. M. (1983). Towards an ecological theory of social perception. Psychological Review, 90, 215-238.
18. Michaels, C. F., & Carello, C. (1981). Direct perception. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
19. Peterson M. A., & Gibson, B. S. (1991). Directing spatial attention within an object: Altering the functional equivalence of shape descriptions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 170-182.
20. Peterson M. A., & Hochberg, J. (1983). Opposed-set measurement procedure: A quantitative analysis of the role of local cues and intention in form perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 183-193.
21. Rock, I. (1983). The logic of perception. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
22. Rogers, S. (2000). The emerging concept of information. Ecological Psychology, 12, 335-343.
23. Ross, L., Lepper, M. R., & Hubbard, M. (1975). Perseverance in self-perception and social perception: Biased attributional processes in the debriefing paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 880-892.
24. Tanaka, J. W., & Curran, T. (2001). A neural basis for expert object recognition. Psychological Science, 12, 43-47.
25. Tsal, Y., & Kolbert, L. (1985). Disambiguating ambiguous figures by selective attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37A, 25-37.
26. Turvey, M. T., Shaw, R. E., Reed, E. S., & Mace, W. M. (1981). Ecological laws of perceiving and acting: In reply to Fodor and Pylyshyn. Cognition, 9, 237-304.
27. Uttal, W. R. (1988). On seeing forms. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. Weldon, M. S., & Roediger, H. L., III. (1987). Altering retrieval demands reverses the picture superiority effect. Memory and Cognition, 15, 269-280.
29. Wilson, T. D., Lisle, D. J., Kraft, D., & Wetzel, C. G. (1989). Preferences as expectation-driven inferences: Effects of affective expectations on affective experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 519-530.
30. Zebrowitz, L. A. (1990). Social perception. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.