University of California, Merced
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, MERCED Giving Responses Dimension: Representational Shifts in Color Space and Event Segmentation Decisions in Physical Space Over Time A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Cognitive and Information Sciences by Laura Jane Kelly Committee in charge: Professor Evan Heit, Chair Professor Rick Dale Professor Michael Spivey 2018 Chapter 4 © 2017 American Psychological Association. Reproduced with permission. All other chapters © 2018 Laura Jane Kelly All rights reserved. The dissertation of Laura Jane Kelly is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: Professor Rick Dale Professor Michael Spivey Professor Evan Heit, Chair University of California, Merced 2018 iii Table of Contents List of Figures viii List of Tables xi Acknowledgements xii Curriculum Vitae xiii Abstract xvii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Beyond Object Metaphors . 1 1.2 Perception and Memory . 2 1.3 Dissertation Roadmap . 3 1.3.1 Theoretical Issues of Representation and Embodiment . 3 1.3.2 Representational Shifts . 3 1.3.2.1 Representational Shifts Made Visible: Movement Away from the Prototype in Memory for Hue . 5 1.3.2.2 Recognition Memory for Hue: Prototypical Bias and the Role of Labeling . 5 1.3.3 Event Perception . 6 1.3.3.1 Event Segmentation Decisions . 7 1.3.4 General Discussion . 8 2 Theoretical Issues of Representation and Embodiment 9 2.1 Representation . 9 2.1.1 Definition . 9 2.1.2 History . 10 2.1.3 The Current Situation . 10 2.1.4 Objects vs. Processes . 11 2.1.5 Conclusion . 13 2.2 Embodiment . 13 2.2.1 Embodiment Through Experience . 15 2.2.2 Radical Embodied Cognition . 16 2.2.3 Embodiment and Representation . 17 2.3 A Paradigm Shift? . 19 3 Representational Shifts Made Visible: Movement Away from the Prototype in Memory for Hue 25 3.1 Introduction . 25 3.2 Experiment 1a . 28 3.2.1 Method . 29 3.2.1.1 Participants . 29 3.2.1.2 Materials . 29 3.2.1.3 Procedure . 30 iv 3.2.2 Results and Discussion . 30 3.3 Experiment 1b . 34 3.3.1 Method . 34 3.3.2 Results and Discussion . 34 3.4 Experiment 2a . 35 3.4.1 Method . 35 3.4.2 Results and Discussion . 35 3.5 Experiment 2b . 36 3.5.1 Method . 36 3.5.2 Results and Discussion . 37 3.6 General Discussion . 38 3.6.1 Representational Shifts, Depth of Processing, or Transfer Appropriate Processing? . 39 3.6.2 Atypical Shifts . 39 3.6.3 Online Role of Labels . 40 3.6.4 Categorical Perception . 41 3.6.5 Conclusion: Memory, Categorization and Reasoning are Intertwined . 42 4 Recognition Memory for Hue: Prototypical Bias and the Role of Labeling 44 4.1 Introduction . 44 4.1.1 Memory Distortion . 45 4.1.2 How Could Labeling Affect Perception and Memory? 45 4.1.2.1 Labels Distorting Memory . 45 4.1.2.2 Labels Guiding Specificity . 46 4.1.2.3 Labels as an Attentional Focus . 46 4.1.3 Existing Evidence for Systematic Bias . 47 4.1.4 Shifts of What Exactly? . 48 4.1.5 Experiment Rationale . 49 4.2 Experiment 1 . 49 4.2.1 Method . 50 4.2.1.1 Participants . 50 4.2.2.2 Stimuli . 50 4.2.1.3 Procedure . 51 4.2.2 Results and Discussion . 52 4.3 Experiment 2 . 55 4.3.1 Method . 55 4.3.2 Results and Discussion . 55 4.4 Experiment 3 . 57 4.4.1 Method . 57 4.4.2 Results and Discussion . 58 4.5 Experiment 4 . 59 4.5.1 Method . 60 4.5.2 Results and Discussion . 60 4.6 General Discussion . 61 4.6.1 Shifts of What? . 63 4.6.2 Limitations . 64 v 4.6.3 Prototypical vs. Atypical Shifts . 65 4.6.4 Broader Implications . 66 4.6.4.1 Category Structure . 66 4.6.4.2 Estimation Bias . 67 4.6.4.3 Language and Thought . 67 4.6.5 Conclusion . 68 4.7 Appendix A . 68 4.7.1 Item Randomization . 69 4.7.2 Color Calculations . 70 4.7.3 Hue Accuracy Analysis . 71 4.8 Appendix B . 71 4.8.1 Category Memory Test . 71 4.8.1.1 Method . 72 4.8.1.1.1 Participants . 72 4.8.1.1.2 Stimuli . 72 4.8.1.1.3 Procedure . 72 4.8.1.2 Results and Discussion . 72 4.8.2 Typicality Norming . 73 4.8.2.1 Method . 73 4.8.2.1.1 Participants . 73 4.8.2.1.2 Stimuli . 74 4.8.2.1.3 Procedure . 74 4.8.2.2 Results and Discussion . 74 5 Event Perception and the Event Segmentation Theory 75 5.1 Introduction . 75 5.2 Event Segmentation Theory . 76 5.2.1 Definitions and Model Description . 76 5.2.2 Key Claims . 77 5.3 Assumptions . 78 5.4 Empirical Review . 78 5.4.1 Segmentation . 79 5.4.1.1 Segmentation: Empirical Evidence . 79 5.4.1.2 Segmentation: Discussion . 81 5.4.2 Hierarchical Structure . 82 5.4.2.1 Hierarchical Structure: Empirical Evidence . 82 5.4.2.2 Hierarchical Structure: Discussion . 83 5.4.3 Memory . 84 5.4.3.1 Memory: Empirical Evidence . 84 5.4.3.2 Memory: Discussion . 85 5.5 Conclusion . 86 6 Event Segmentation Decisions 88 6.1 Introduction . 88 6.1.1 Experiment Roadmap . 89 6.2 Experiment 1 . 89 6.2.1 Method . 90 6.2.1.1 Participants . 90 6.2.1.2 Materials . 91 vi 6.2.1.3 Procedure . 92 6.2.1.4 Response Collection . 92 6.2.2 Results . 92 6.2.2.1 Segmentation Metrics . 93 6.2.2.1.1 Event Duration . 93 6.2.2.1.2 Overlap . 97 6.2.2.1.3 Segmentation Agreement . 98 6.2.2.2 Trajectories . 102 6.2.2.2.1 Expectation Values at Segmentation . 105 6.2.3 Discussion . 107 6.3 Experiment 2 . 109 6.3.1 Method . 109 6.3.1.1 Participants . 109 6.3.1.2 Materials . 110 6.3.1.3 Procedure . 112 6.3.1.4 Response Collection . 112 6.3.2 Results . 112 6.3.2.1 Segmentation Metrics . 113 6.3.2.1.1 Event Duration . 113 6.3.2.1.2 Segmentation Agreement . 114 6.3.2.1.3 Discrete Hierarchical Alignment . 116 6.3.2.1.4 Continuous Hierarchical Alignment . 117 6.3.2.2 Trajectories . 118 6.3.2.2.1 Area Under the Curve . 123 6.3.3 Discussion . 125 6.4 General Discussion . 126 6.4.1 Trajectory Response Implications and Limitations . 127 6.4.2 Future Analyses . 129 6.4.2.1 Experiment 1 . 129 6.4.2.2 Experiment 2 . 130 6.4.3 Theoretical Contributions . 131 6.4.4 Conclusion . 133 7 General Discussion 135 7.1 Summary . ..