-> Template-Matching Theory [TEMPLATES]

Stimuli are compared to a set of templates (specific patterns stored in memory), and matched with the closest. (Some born with but others developed along life)

Problem: Cannot account for recognising stimuli as the same context, even though presentation is different, e.g. upside down.

  • Would require too many templates
  • Concrete and not flexible
  • Unable to comprehend parts of objects
  • Unable to account for the complexity of human perception

-> Prototype Model Theory [PROTOTYPES]

We have prototypes (abstract idealised patterns) in memory, and matched but don't have to be exact. If close enough, you can recognise the stimuli, if inadequate then keep searching.

  • Prototypes are good for accounting the flexibility of perception.
  • Demonstrates creation of capacity and applying it.

Reed's Experiment: People forming own prototypes of the two sets of faces.

  • New faces were compared to the prototypes and the classification was consistent.

Distinctive-Features Models Theory [DISTINCTIVE FEATURES]

We discriminate between items on the basis of a small number of characteristics, not the entire stimulus. Mostly used with testing letter recognition, e.g. Eleanor Gibson.

  • Recognise letters by distinctive features of letters (matrix of distinctive features).
  • More similar = easier to group, more distinct = harder to group.
  • Sub components that build up.

Recognition-by-Component Theory [GEONS]

Objects are represented as an arrangement of simple 3D shapes called geons.

  • 24 geons that can be combined to create a meaningful object and words.
  • Majority are classified with three geons.

No one theory of perception has explained the ability to perceive so much complexity so quickly.

Similar posts: