Does our mind's eye match real life? New study shows differences in how
we perceive images

Date:
September 2, 2021
Source:
University of Plymouth
Summary:
A new study investigated how we visualize things that we have
already seen, discovering that many adults are resistant to
imagining their own vision as if it were a flat image -- seeing
it in its fully processed, knowledge-laden form instead.



FULL STORY ==========================================================================
We are all used to seeing the 3D world that we live in reduced to 2D,
whether in art, photography, or film.


==========================================================================
But, when we close our eyes, how do we visualise things that we have
already seen? A new study led by the Universities or Plymouth and Essex investigated this question, discovering that many adults are resistant
to imagining their own vision as if it were a flat image -- seeing it
in its fully processed, knowledge-laden form instead.

The results came asthe researchers showed 58 adults two lines on a wall,
both of which were the same length but one was closer to the participant
and hence appeared visually longer (see picture attached).

Despite the instruction to base their judgements on appearance
specifically (ie the closer line should be longer) approximately half
of the participants judged the lines to appear the same. When they took
a photo of the lines and were asked how long they appeared in the image
their responses shifted; now the closer line appeared longer. However,
when they were asked again about their own view they reverted to their
original response.

This suggests that even when participants are made explicitly aware
of what a 2D image of their vision might look like they treated actual
sensory input differently -- with considerable resistance to seeing what
are called our "proximal representations" of vision (how things appear
before our brains have had a chance to correct for things like relative
size and distance).

Lead author Dr Steven Samuel, a Lecturer in Psychology at the University
of Plymouth, said: "It's complex and exciting to uncover how each of us
sees and visualises different things -- and the fact that half of our
study population did not think in 2D was a very interesting finding.

"The next question to ask is why did these people think in that way? Is
it that they could not think in 2D, or that they chose not to? We do not
know for certain, but one explanation is that people are resistant to the principlethat vision can be equated to a flat image -- with 'corrected'
vision the only type of vision they could reasonably conceive of. This
implies that adults are disinclinedto entertain vision in as a proximal
image, even when the context is favourable to such behaviour. However,
it does not mean that they are necessarily unableto do so." ========================================================================== Story Source: Materials provided by University_of_Plymouth. Original
written by Mrs Amy King.

Note: Content may be edited for style and length.


========================================================================== Journal Reference:
1. Steven Samuel, Klara Hagspiel, Geoff G. Cole, Madeline J. Eacott.

`Seeing' proximal representations: Testing attitudes to the
relationship between vision and images. PLOS ONE, 2021; 16 (8):
e0256658 DOI: 10.1371/ journal.pone.0256658 ==========================================================================

Link to news story: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/09/210902125031.htm

--- up 8 hours, 25 minutes
* Origin: -=> Castle Rock BBS <=- Now Husky HPT Powered! (1:317/3)