semantic categorisation and movement

Kerry Bennett kerryb at gas.sci.monash.edu.au
Sun Oct 6 19:22:43 EST 1996


No they were not categorised according to profession but we did find
that we had to discard some stimuli because of cultural differences e.g.
artichoke

kenneth paul collins wrote:
> 
> Hmmm... "all [...] were highly familiar"...
> 
> ...did you categorize your subjects by profession ("sub-culture")? ken
> 
> Kerry Bennett wrote:
> >
> > Thank-you for this contribution
> >
> > Prior to the main experiment we tested 15 other participants for 42
> > stimuli on three perceptual features: familiarity, visual complexity,
> > and visual agreement. The pictures were all obtained from a reasonably
> > standardised set(Snodgrass and Vanderwart, 1980). From these 42 we
> > selected 30 which were comparable across these three features; that is,
> > all (irrespective of category) were highly familiar, not very complex
> > and agreed with the mental representation of the object.
> >
> > One contributor who contacted us privately via email has suggested to
> > look at 'hardness' vs 'softness', and aspects of linear composition of
> > the stimuli. This same contributor has also suggested using words to
> > tease out whether it is a semantic effect or a perceptual effect.__________________________________________________
> People hate because they fear, and they fear because
> they do not understand, and they do not understand
> because hating is less work than understanding.



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list