Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

The Scientific Method02:40

The Scientific Method

66.9K
Research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.
66.9K
The Scientific Method01:32

The Scientific Method

274.4K
The scientific method is a detailed, empirical problem-solving process used by biologists and other scientists. This iterative approach involves formulating a question based on observation, developing a testable potential explanation for the observation (called a hypothesis), making and testing predictions based on the hypothesis, and using the findings to create new hypotheses and predictions.
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...
274.4K
McNemar's Test01:23

McNemar's Test

956
McNemar's Test is a nonparametric statistical test used to determine if there is a significant difference in proportions between two related groups when the outcome is binary (e.g., yes/no, success/failure). It is beneficial when we have paired data, such as pre-test/post-test designs, where the same subjects are measured under two different conditions. The test is named after the statistician Quinn McNemar, who introduced it in 1947. It is commonly used in situations where subjects are...
956
Multiple Comparison Tests01:13

Multiple Comparison Tests

4.5K
Multiple comparison test, abbreviated as MCT, is a post hoc analysis generally performed after comparing multiple samples with one or more tests. An MCT will help identify a significantly different sample among multiple samples or a factor among multiple factors.
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
4.5K
Naturalistic Observations02:30

Naturalistic Observations

17.9K
If you want to understand how behavior occurs, one of the best ways to gain information is to simply observe the behavior in its natural context. However, people might change their behavior in unexpected ways if they know they are being observed. How do researchers obtain accurate information when people tend to hide their natural behavior? As an example, imagine that your professor asks everyone in your class to raise their hand if they always wash their hands after using the restroom. Chances...
17.9K
Cochran's Q Test01:17

Cochran's Q Test

1.1K
Cochran's Q Test is a nonparametric statistical test used to determine if there are potential differences in the outcomes of three or more related groups on a binary (yes/no) or dichotomous outcome. It is essentially an extension of the McNemar Test, which is limited to two related samples - Cochran's Q test can handle three or more related samples, making it more versatile in scenarios where subjects are measured under multiple conditions. The test statistic follows a Chi-Square...
1.1K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Multisensory horizon.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2026
Same author

Adversarial collaborations: all theories must be subject to critical evaluation.

Nature·2025
Same author

What makes a theory of consciousness unscientific?

Nature neuroscience·2025
Same author

The sustenance and retention of perspectival shape representations.

Consciousness and cognition·2024
Same author

Corrigendum to "Neural representations of perspectival shapes and attentional effects: Evidence from fMRI and MEG" [Cortex 176 (July 2024s) 129-143].

Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior·2024
Same author

Causal prominence for neuroscience.

Nature reviews. Neuroscience·2024
Same journal

To appear in a new light: Varying illumination colors induce dynamic transformations of perceptual qualities in still images.

i-Perception·2026
Same journal

Pseudo-slimy: A novel phenomenon to evoke stickiness perception.

i-Perception·2026
Same journal

Predictive visual uncertainty around moving trajectories influences causality judgments in launching displays.

i-Perception·2026
Same journal

Light and shape in the work of Robert Fones.

i-Perception·2026
Same journal

Sensorimotor numerosity uniquely supports arithmetic development in children.

i-Perception·2026
Same journal

In praise of anaglyphs.

i-Perception·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 17, 2026

Testing for Metacognitive Responding Using an Odor-based Delayed Match-to-Sample Test in Rats
08:06

Testing for Metacognitive Responding Using an Odor-based Delayed Match-to-Sample Test in Rats

Published on: June 18, 2018

7.7K

Obstacles to Testing Molyneux's Question Empirically.

Tony Cheng1

  • 1Department of Philosophy, University College London, UK.

I-Perception
|July 20, 2016
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Empirical studies on Molyneux's question face challenges. This research critiques proposed experimental modifications, suggesting current empirical approaches may be overly optimistic for resolving the core question.

Keywords:
Molyneux questionamodal representationblind subjectsmovementraised-line drawingstouch

More Related Videos

Using Enclosed Y-Mazes to Assess Chemosensory Behavior in Reptiles
06:15

Using Enclosed Y-Mazes to Assess Chemosensory Behavior in Reptiles

Published on: April 7, 2021

6.3K
Evaluating Tests of Cognition using a Computerized Touch-Sensitive Tablet, Eye Tracking, and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
10:10

Evaluating Tests of Cognition using a Computerized Touch-Sensitive Tablet, Eye Tracking, and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Published on: January 30, 2026

443

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Mar 17, 2026

Testing for Metacognitive Responding Using an Odor-based Delayed Match-to-Sample Test in Rats
08:06

Testing for Metacognitive Responding Using an Odor-based Delayed Match-to-Sample Test in Rats

Published on: June 18, 2018

7.7K
Using Enclosed Y-Mazes to Assess Chemosensory Behavior in Reptiles
06:15

Using Enclosed Y-Mazes to Assess Chemosensory Behavior in Reptiles

Published on: April 7, 2021

6.3K
Evaluating Tests of Cognition using a Computerized Touch-Sensitive Tablet, Eye Tracking, and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
10:10

Evaluating Tests of Cognition using a Computerized Touch-Sensitive Tablet, Eye Tracking, and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Published on: January 30, 2026

443

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Science
  • Neuroscience
  • Philosophy of Mind

Background:

  • Molyneux's question explores the relationship between vision and touch.
  • Recent empirical studies, like those by the Held group, attempt to address this question.
  • These studies have faced objections and proposed modifications.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate proposed empirical modifications to experiments addressing Molyneux's question.
  • To critically assess the feasibility of resolving Molyneux's question through current empirical methods.
  • To argue against the optimism surrounding empirical resolutions.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of existing empirical studies and their critiques.
  • Examination of proposed experimental modifications by Schwenkler and Connolly.
  • Theoretical argumentation regarding the limitations of empirical approaches.

Main Results:

  • Schwenkler's proposed modifications, involving object/subject movement or simpler shapes, are analyzed.
  • Connolly's critique of the movement modification and agreement with the simpler shapes modification are considered.
  • The article argues that using simpler shapes is also problematic, though potentially surmountable.

Conclusions:

  • Both proposed modifications to empirical studies of Molyneux's question present significant challenges.
  • Current empirical approaches may be overly optimistic in their ability to definitively answer Molyneux's question.
  • Further theoretical and methodological advancements are needed to fully address the question empirically.