The necker-zeno model for bistable perception

Topics in Cognitive Science

Volumn 5, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 800-817

  Atmanspacher, Harald ^a,b   Filk, Thomas ^a,c,d  

^a Institute for Frontier Areas of Psychology   (Germany)

^b Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Collegium Helveticum   (Switzerland)

^c PARMENIDES FOUNDATION   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Acategorial states; Bell inequality; Bistable perception; Cognitive time scales; Necker Zeno model; Non commuting operations; Temporal nonlocality

Indexed keywords

ACATEGORIAL STATES; ARTICLE; AWARENESS; BELL INEQUALITY; BISTABLE PERCEPTION; COGNITIVE TIME SCALES; HUMAN; NECKER-ZENO MODEL; NON-COMMUTING OPERATIONS; PERCEPTION; PHYSIOLOGY; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOLOGY; QUANTUM THEORY; TEMPORAL NONLOCALITY; TIME;

ACATEGORIAL STATES; BELL INEQUALITY; BISTABLE PERCEPTION; COGNITIVE TIME SCALES; NECKER-ZENO MODEL; NON-COMMUTING OPERATIONS; TEMPORAL NONLOCALITY;

AWARENESS; HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PERCEPTION; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLOGY; QUANTUM THEORY; TIME; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84885482538     PISSN: 17568757     EISSN: 17568765     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/tops.12044     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Aerts, D., Gabora, L., & Sozzo, S. (2013). How concepts combine: A quantum theoretic modeling of human thought. Topics in Cognitive Science, this issue.
2. Aspect, A., Dalibard, J., & Roger, G. (1982). Experimental test of Bell's inequalities using time-varying analyzers. Physical Review Letters, 49, 1804-1807.
3. Atmanspacher, H. (2011). Quantum approaches to consciousness. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2011 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-consciousness/
4. Atmanspacher, H., & Amann, A. (1998). Positive operator valued measures and projection valued measures of non-commutative time operators. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 37, 629-650.
5. Atmanspacher, H., Bach, M., Filk, T., Kornmeier, J., & Römer, H. (2008). Cognitive time scales in a Necker-Zeno model for bistable perception. Open Cybernetics and Systemics Journal, 2, 234-251.
6. Atmanspacher, H., & Fach, W. (2005). Acategoriality as mental instability. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 26, 181-206.
7. Atmanspacher, H., & Filk, T. (2003). Discrimination and sequentialization of events in perception. In R. Buccheri, M. Saniga, and W.M. Stuckey (Eds.), The nature of time: Geometry, physics, and perception (pp. 67-75). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
8. Atmanspacher, H., & Filk, T. (2010). A proposed test of temporal nonlocality in bistable perception. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 54, 314-321.
9. Atmanspacher, H., & Filk, T. (2011). Options for testing temporal Bell inequalities for mental systems. In D. Song, M. Melucci, I. Frommholz, P. Zhang, L. Wang, and S. Arafat (Ed.), Quantum interaction - QI 2011 (pp. 128-137). Berlin: Springer.
10. Atmanspacher, H., & Filk, T. (2012). Contra classical causality: Violating temporal Bell inequalities in mental systems. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 19(5/6), 95-116.
11. Atmanspacher, H., Filk, T., & Römer, H. (2004). Quantum Zeno features of bistable perception. Biological Cybernetics, 90, 33-40.
12. Atmanspacher, H., Filk, T., & Römer, H. (2006). Weak quantum theory: Formal framework and selected applications. In G. Adenier, A. Khrennikov, and Th. M. Nieuwenhuizen (Eds.), Quantum theory: Reconsideration of foundations - 3 (pp. 34-46). New York: American Institute of Physics.
13. Atmanspacher, H., Filk, T., & Römer, H. (2009). Complementarity in bistable perception. In H. Atmanspacher and H. Primas (Eds.), Recasting reality - Wolfgang Pauli's philosophical ideas in contemporary science (pp. 135-150). Berlin: Springer.
14. Atmanspacher, H. & Römer, H. (2012). Order effects in sequential measurements of non-commuting psychological observables. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 56, 274-280.
15. Atmanspacher, H., Römer, H., & Walach H. (2002). Weak quantum theory: Complementarity and entanglement in physics and beyond. Foundations of Physics, 32, 379-406.
16. Bell, J. S. (1966). On the problem of hidden variables in quantum theory. Reviews of Modern Physics, 38, 447-452.
17. Blake, R., & Logothetis, N. (2002). Visual competition. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 1-11.
18. Borsellino, A., de Marco, A., Alazetta A., Rinesi S. & Bartolini, R. (1972). Reversal time distribution in the perception of visual ambiguous stimuli. Kybernetik, 10, 139-144.
19. Brascamp, J. W., van Ee, R., Pestman W. R., & den Berg, A. V. (2005). Distributions of alternation rates in various forms of bistable perception. Journal of Vision, 5, 287-298.
20. Bruza, P., Kitto, K., Ramm, B., & Sitbon, L. (2013). A probabilistic framework for analyzing the compositionality of conceptual combinations. Cognitive Science, under review.
21. Busemeyer, J., Wang, Z., & Townsend, J. T. (2006). Quantum dynamics of human decision making. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 50, 220-241.
22. Busemeyer, J. R., & Bruza, P. (2012). Quantum models of cognition and decision. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
23. Dehaene, S., & Changeux, J.-P. (2011). Experimental and theoretical approaches to conscious processing. Neuron, 70, 200-227.
24. d'Espagnat, B. (1979). The quantum theory and reality. Scientific American, 241, 158-181.
25. deWitt, B. S. (1970). Quantum mechanics and reality. Physics Today, 23, 30-35.
26. Dornic, S. (1967). Measurement of satiation in reversible figures. Studia Psychologica, 9, 18-24.
27. Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., & Rosen, N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Physical Review, 47, 777-780.
28. Everett, H. (1957). "Relative state" formulation of quantum mechanics. Reviews of Modern Physics, 29, 454-462.
29. Filk, T., & von Müller, A. (2009). Quantum physics and consciousness: The quest for a common conceptual foundation. Mind and Matter, 7, 59-79.
30. Filk, T., & Römer, H. (2011). Generalized quantum theory: Overview and latest developments. Axiomathes, 21, 211-220.
31. Kochen, S., & Specker, E. (1967). The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics, 17, 59-87.
32. Kornmeier, J., & Bach, M. (2004). Early neural activity in Necker cube reversal: Evidence for low-level processing of a gestalt phenomenon. Psychophysiology, 41, 1-8.
33. Kornmeier, J., Ehm, W., Bigalke, H., & Bach, M. (2007). Discontinuous presentation of ambiguous figures: How interstimulus-interval durations affect reversal dynamics and ERPs. Psychophysiology, 44, 552-560.
34. Kornmeier, J., & Bach, M. (2012): Ambiguous figures - What happens in the brain if perception changes but not the stimulus. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 1-23.
35. Leggett, A. J., & Garg, A. (1985). Quantum mechanics versus macroscopic realism: Is the flux there when nobody looks? Physical Review Letters, 54, 857-860.
36. Long, G. M., & Toppino, T. C. (2004). Enduring interest in perceptual ambiguity: Alternating views of reversible figures. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 748-768.
37. Mahler, G. (1994). Temporal Bell inequalities: A journey to the limits of "consistent histories." In H. Atmanspacher and G. Dalenoort (Eds.), Inside versus outside. Endo- and exo-concepts of observation and knowledge in physics, philosophy and cognitive science (pp. 195-205). Berlin: Springer.
38. Mahler, G. (1997). Nonlocality in quantum dynamics. In H. Atmanspacher and E. Ruhnau (Eds.), Time, temporality, now (pp. 347-363). Berlin: Springer.
39. Misra, B., & Sudarshan, E. C. G. (1977). The Zeno's paradox in quantum theory. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 18, 756-763.
40. Meng, M., & Tong, F. (2004). Can attention selectively bias bistable perception? Differences between binocular rivalry and ambiguous figures. Journal of Vision, 4, 539-551.
41. Mermin, N. D. (1990). What's wrong with these elements of reality? Physics Today, June 1990, 9. See also: Quantum mysteries revisited, American Journal of Physics 58, 731-734 (1990).
42. Necker, L. A. (1832). Observations on some remarkable phenomenon which occurs in viewing a figure of a crystal or geometrical solid. The London and Edinburgh Philosophy Magazine and Journal of Science, 3, 329-337.
43. Orbach, J., Zucker, E., & Olson, R. (1966). Reversibility of the Necker cube: VII. Reversal rate as a function of figure-on and figure-off durations. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 22, 615-618.
44. Pöppel, E. (1997). A hierarchical model of temporal perception. Trends in Cognitive Science, 1, 56-61.
45. Price, J. R. (1969). Effect of extended observation on reversible perspective duration. Psychonomic Science, 16, 75-76.
46. Primas, H. (1990). Mathematical and philosophical questions in the theory of open and macroscopic quantum systems. In A. I. Miller (Ed.), Sixty-two years of uncertainty (pp. 233-257). Berlin: Springer.
47. Rédei, M. (1996). Why John von Neumann did not like the Hilbert space formalism of quantum mechanics (and what he liked instead). Studies in the History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 27, 493-510.
48. Rédei, M., & Summers, S. J. (2007). Quantum probability theory. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 38, 390-417.
49. Reisberg, D., & O'Shaughnessy, M. (1984). Diverting subjects' concentration slows figural reversals. Perception, 13, 461-468.
50. Sudarshan, E. C. G. (1983). Perception of quantum systems. In A. van der Merwe (Ed.), Old and new questions in physics, cosmology, philosophy, and theoretical biology (pp. 457-467). New York: Plenum.
51. van Ee, R. (2005): Dynamics of perceptual bi-stability for stereoscopic slant rivalry and a comparison with grating, house-face, and Necker cube rivalry. Vision Research, 45, 29-40.
52. vanRullen, R., Reddy, L., & Koch, C. (2005). The continuous wagon wheel illusion is associated with changes in electroencephalogram power at ≈ 13 Hz. Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 502-507.
53. Vickers, D. (1972). A cyclic decision model of perceptual alternation. Perception, 1, 31-48.
54. Wang, Z., Busemeyer, J. R., Atmanspacher, H., & Pothos, E. (2013). The potential of using quantum theory to build models of cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science, this issue.
55. Wilde, M. M., & Mizel, A. (2012). Addressing the clumsiness loophole in a Leggett-Garg test of macrorealism. Foundations of Physics, 42, 256-265.