tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8182098.post110572868956965232..comments2024-03-08T04:09:09.836-06:00Comments on Mixing Memory: I Didn't Even Notice That You Had a New HeadChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08417970139690159046noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8182098.post-1132075418854465792005-11-15T11:23:00.000-06:002005-11-15T11:23:00.000-06:00Thank you for your fascintaing pages. I wondered i...Thank you for your fascintaing pages. I wondered if you might know about a real world interaction change study that involved students joining their library and not noticing the library assistant swapped roles with another - even thugh there was a rather large sign saying " experiment going on here" above the library desk?<BR/>Would appreciate your help or any informationAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8182098.post-1105753524918069092005-01-14T19:45:00.000-06:002005-01-14T19:45:00.000-06:00Richard, it's been about 10 years since I read Con...Richard, it's been about 10 years since I read <EM>Consciousness Explained</EM>, so I only remember the gist of Dennett's argument (your post helped to remind me). I think his view is mirrored in the visual neuroscience literature under the label "passive filling in," which basically means that the brain simply ignores the blind spot. I recall him being cited as favoring that view, but it's been a while since I've read the older papers on the blind spot. As far as I can tell, though, the accepted view today (and perhaps for the last 10 years) is that the filling-in process is active. There are several different forms of evidence for this, including evidence from imaging studies and binocular rivalry studies. The first type show that when there are blind spots caused by lesions to the retina, the neurons in V1 that correspond to the retinal areas surrounding that area seem to be used to fill in the information (essentially copying the information from those neurons). The same also seems to be happening in imaging studies of the neurons corresponding to the regions around the normal blind spot (in monkeys, mostly). The binocular rivalry studies involve causing one eye to be slightly off relative to its normal position with respect to the other eye. in this situation, binocular rivalry occurs beteween the area in one eye that normally corresponds to the blind spot in the other eye, and the area of the other eye that is now where the blind spot should be. In other words, the first eye is still trying to fill in the space where the blind spot should be, but since a visual signal is now coming from that spot, the two signals compete.<br /><br />There are many more experiments that provide support for the "active" version of filling in, and I think there's even a book out now on filling-in phenomena, by Pessoa and someone else, though I haven't read it (I just saw it on someone's desk a while back).  <br /><br /><A></A><A></A>Posted by<A><B> </B></A><A HREF="http://www.blogger.com/r?http%3A%2F%2Fmixingmemory.blogspot.com" TITLE="mixingmemory at gmail dot com">Chris</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8182098.post-1105750695424968052005-01-14T18:58:00.000-06:002005-01-14T18:58:00.000-06:00Yeah, it's fascinating stuff. Dennett talks a lot...Yeah, it's fascinating stuff. Dennett talks a lot about this sort of thing in <I>Consciousness Explained</I>, to highlight that we fail to detect our own detection failure, as you put it. He uses this to argue that what we normally take to be <A HREF="http://www.blogger.com/r?http%3A%2F%2Fpixnaps.blogspot.com%2F2004%2F12%2Ffilling-in-for-presentation.html">'filling in'</A> (e.g. the blindspot, etc) are really just cases of 'leaving out' and failing to realise it. Would you agree with this, Chris, or do you think he's taking the idea of 'neglect' too far? <br /><br /><A></A><A></A>Posted by<A><B> </B></A><A HREF="http://www.blogger.com/r?pixnaps.blogspot.com%2F" TITLE="r dot chappell at gmail dot com">Richard</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8182098.post-1105740228262277232005-01-14T16:03:00.000-06:002005-01-14T16:03:00.000-06:00Hi John, and thanks for the coompliments. It's alw...Hi John, and thanks for the coompliments. It's always good to know that someone enjoys the posts. <br /><br /><A></A><A></A>Posted by<A><B> </B></A><A HREF="http://www.blogger.com/r?http%3A%2F%2Fmixingmemory.blogspot.com" TITLE="mixingmemory at gmail dot com">Chris</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8182098.post-1105735328526435362005-01-14T14:42:00.000-06:002005-01-14T14:42:00.000-06:00Wow! Your writing is very clear, full of energy an...Wow! Your writing is very clear, full of energy and wit, and densely packed with fascinating information. Great job! Keep it up, if only so I can read more and learn more!! <br /><br /><A></A><A></A>Posted by<A><B> </B></A><A HREF="http://www.blogger.com/r?http%3A%2F%2Fmixingmemory.blogspot.com%2F2005%2F01%2Fi-didnt-even-notice-that-you-had-new.html%23comments" TITLE="TranscendHumanism at hotmail dot com">John Trevel</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com