Perception and Attention - Essay Example

Perception The two views are in no way different. The first view of perception inculcates how an individual can create his own patterns of decisions in everyday life. These patterns require a long process which means that there is a step-by-step procedure of concluding something which could somehow alter one’s thought. It almost goes along with the impression of the second perceptual view which tells how one’s cognitive aspect could be involved in making one’s own decision. Moreover, the second view also tells that the perceptions do not directly tell the external features of what a person could observe.

Thus, the second view is pertinent to the first view of perception wherein the course and progress in a lifetime is required to interpret the sensory experiences with an in-depth insight for an appropriate decision and action to be taken. The two views are more related to the top-down approach of perception because one would learn how to construct his own understanding from the precepts being observed (as cited in Sternberg, 2006, p. 143). Accordingly, these precepts emphasized how a person could sense information, associate information with one’s stored knowledge, and use one’s ability of high-level reasoning.

Hence, the precepts of these two views could have the ability to produce qualia, which could correspond to the intention of the two perceptual views. Furthermore, qualia is, indeed, needed by the two views because one could learn how to have an internal, subjective interpretation to the senses involved when stimulated into things. AttentionThe best model for the visual perception of a person in a baseball game is the top-down attention model with bottom-up saliency (Ban, 2010). Top-down model determines one’s focus of attention through the movement of one’s eyes (Goldstein, 2011).

With the saliency of bottom-up, one can easily identify the movements of the players as part of the physical properties that can be directly observed in watching the game. Another feature that can be easily observed is the ball that would be thrown to the players who will hit it with a bat. Balls and bat are additional resources that would be the centers of attention of a visual perceiver. Thus, these things could be part of the bottom-up stimuli that will be prominent enough to be easily focused.

However, the collaboration of top-down and bottom-up attentions could spring up an advantageous theory which is the “growing fuzzy topology adaptive resonance theory” (Ban, 2010). This theory supports the model’s idea that a perceiver would use his algorithmic knowledge of the game as one tries to cognitively process the mechanics of the baseball game (Carpenter & Grossberg, 2002). Consequently, the inclusion of the theory in this paper would justify how the model constructs the perceiver’s attention.

Through this theory, a perceiver would easily apply the top-down attention model with bottom-up saliency in remembering the features of the objects and area of the game. In addition, one would be fastidious enough in attending to the goal and target of the game specifically when a ball would be hit by a player. ReferenceBan, S. (2010). Top-down visual selective attention model combined with bottom-up saliency map for incremental object perception. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5596376&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.

jsp%3Farnumber%3D5596376Carpenter, G. A., & Grossberg, S. (2002). Adaptive resonance theory. In M. A. Arbib (Ed.), The handbook of brain theory and neural networks (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Goldstein, E. B. (2011). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research and everyday experience (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Sternberg, R. J. (2006). Cognitive psychology (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.