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 Experiment Videos

Seeing and thinking: Foundational issues and empirical horizons.

Chaz Firestone1, Brian J Scholl1

  • 1Department of Psychology,Yale University,New Haven,CT 06520-8205.chaz.firestone@yale.edubrian.scholl@yale.edu.

The Behavioral and Brain Sciences
|March 31, 2017
PubMed
Summary

This study explores the complex relationship between seeing and thinking, addressing diverse experimental and theoretical questions. It examines how our perceptions and cognitive processes interact across various contexts.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Pretending Not to Know Reveals a Capacity for Model-Based Self-Simulation.

Psychological science·2026
Same author

Part-whole effects in visual number estimation.

Attention, perception & psychophysics·2026
Same author

The spontaneous prioritization of "unfinishedness" in perception: A visual Zeigarnik effect.

Journal of experimental psychology. General·2026
Same author

Dynamic categorical memory distortion from "visual verbs".

Cognition·2025
Same author

Number adaptation survives spatial displacement.

Current biology : CB·2025
Same author

The El Greco Fallacy, this Time with Feeling: How (not) to Measure Group Differences in Emotional Intensity.

Affective science·2025

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Science
  • Neuroscience
  • Philosophy of Mind

Background:

  • The nature of perception and cognition is multifaceted, with ongoing debates regarding their interplay.
  • Understanding the mechanisms of seeing and thinking requires examining diverse experimental paradigms and theoretical frameworks.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To address a wide range of questions arising from varied responses to a target article on seeing and thinking.
  • To explore the falsifiability of a specific viewpoint on perception and cognition.
  • To investigate the implications of neuroscientific theories and address specific phenomena like mental imagery and conflicting perceptual/cognitive states.

Main Methods:

  • The study involves a critical analysis of diverse viewpoints and experimental data.

Related Experiment Videos

  • It engages with theoretical concepts in cognitive science and neuroscience.
  • Discussions encompass a broad spectrum of topics, from experimental design to philosophical considerations.

    • Main Results:

    • The varied responses highlight the complexity and contested nature of understanding seeing and thinking.
    • The analysis reveals limitations in current neuroscientific theories and the need for more precise models.
    • Specific examples, including mental imagery and perceptual conflicts, illustrate the intricate relationship between sensory input and cognitive interpretation.

    Conclusions:

    • The study concludes that the relationship between seeing and thinking is highly complex and requires nuanced theoretical approaches.
    • It emphasizes the importance of rigorous experimental design and falsifiable hypotheses in cognitive science.
    • Further research is needed to reconcile theoretical frameworks with empirical observations across diverse phenomena.