Compare and Contrast Gibson’s and Gregory’s theories of perception

Gibsons and Gregorys theories of light twain(prenominal) suggest that eye-retina is important for cognition. The both believe that without eye-retina, a person lead not be able to see. This is a common view of both of the theories of percept. The idea is supported by the case of SB. SB was a military man who had been blind from birth due to cataracts. When he was 52, he had an operation which restored his stool and hence he could see. Thus, this case has shown the greatness of eye-retina for things to be savvyd.And therefore, supports both of theories of recognition which eye-retina is essential for scholarship. Gibson believes in the direct theories of perception which he use the surmisal of bottom-up touch on to explain opthalmic illusions whereas Gregory believes in the indirect theories of perception and he used the hypothesis of top-down process to explain visual illusions. The bottom-up ar based on the assumption that we diddle up in our analysis of the visual world form basic afferent stimulant drugs at the bottom level towards the higher, more cognitive levels of the brain.The top-down processing theories argon based on the assumption that we can only perceive our visual world accurately if we use stored knowledge and problem-solving skills. Thus, there be differences amid their theories of perception. Gregorys indirect possible action of perception and Gibsons electric charge theory of perception had led to the tip over of nature-nurture. This is a big debate in Psychology whether perception is determined by contagiouss as proposed by Gibsons theory or whether it is learnt or determined by upbringing and social linguistic mise en scene as proposed by Gregorys theory.On the ane hand, Nativists deliberate that nature is more important factor which people ar the products of their genetics and that we are born with certain behaviours. On the other hand, empiricists think that experience and nurture is the more important facto r. They think that situational factors and upbringing grow a greater influence on outcome. An eclectic approach qualificationiness show that it is an interaction between nature and nurture and that neither spot can tell the full story. It may be that a genetic predisposition to perception exists, but that situational factors likewise engender to be in place for it to develop.Apart from the above, there are a few more differences between Gibsons and Gregorys theories of perception. Gregory believes that additional processing is required for perception which most forms of background knowledge is needed to make sensation of the environment than upright the sensory input while Gibson believes that perception is part of an inbuilt reconciling mechanism for survival which does not rely on stored knowledge or past experience. Gregory believes that expectations have an impact on perceptions which Gibson disagrees.There is empirical evidence encouraging the idea of Gregory, and th is comes from a necessitate carried out by Simons and Levin. 50% of the participants failed to crystallize that there was a switch of people. This is probably due to the fact that the participants had not expected a change of person. Hence, they were unable to perceive it. Furthermore, a aim carried out by Selfridge also supports the idea of Gregory. Selfridges study demonstrates that our perceptions are mediated by our expectations as people are able to enounce the figures as the cat.This is because people have the expectations of the cat as they are words in common usage. These studies have shown that people saw what they have been expecting to see. Thus, the study demonstrates that expectations affect perception. And hence suggest that Gregorys theory of perception qualification be right instead of Gibsons. Gregory also suggests that we use context for our perceptions which Gibson disagrees. There are supporting evidences for Gregorys assumptions. Selfridges study has shown context exercises on visual perception. This study suggests that context aids perception.Similarly, muffled has demonstrated the use of top-down processing as well as the fact that context influences visual perception. These two studies demonstrate that visual perception is influenced by context. In addition, Gregorys idea is supported by the study carried out by Warren which context influences auditory perception as well. The participants used context to hear the word in the sentence entirely. This shows the importance of context which helps to fill in the missing words. These findings suggested that it may be sure that context is necessary for perception to occur successfully.These studies support Gregorys theory instead of Gibsons. Furthermore, Gregorys theory explains how we can make errors in perception. For instance, we do not necessarily see spelling errors in our written work as we word- through-context. Besides, Gregory suggests that we use stored knowledge and past expe rience to make sense of our visual environment which Gibson does not agree. Moreover, Gregory suggested that some forms of background knowledge, through learning, are needed to make sense of the environment than just the sensory input as suggested by Gibson.Gregory said that, when looking at the Muller-Lyer figure, the line on the left looks longer than that on the right. He believed that this was because we were using top-down processing and assuming that the figure on the left is same(p) the corner of a room that we are in, while the figure on the right is like the corner of a building seen from the outside. Hence, this suggested that we use context for our perceptions. He also pointed to the idea of the hollow mask. When we see a hollow mask from the inside, we perceive it as pointing outwards, because this is what we are used to.However, there are problems with Gregorys outlook. Firstly, if we deem a derivation of the Muller-Lyer illusion and replace the arrows with circles, w e can see that the effect still holds, even though we could not possibly be imagining the corners of rooms or buildings, etc. Thus, Gregorys assumption of the theory of perception might be wrong. Furthermore, Gibson argues that information form visual illusions should not be used because it is a fake stimulus that could not happen in the authoritative world which suggested that the theory cannot be applied in real look situation.However, visual illusions do happen in real life such(prenominal) as trains and car wash. Even so, Gibson believes in the direct theory of perception which is an opposing theory to Gregorys. He believes that we do not need front knowledge to perceive objects correctly. Gibson suggests that perception is shaped by biological heritage instead of what Gregory has suggested. According to Warren and Hannon, participants were able to make judgements about counseling using dots which support Gibsons optic flow patterns.And this demonstrates that Gibsons theory might be right instead of Gregorys. However, study carried out by Lee and Lishman has shown that adults have more experiences about the world than children and thus has bewilder doubt upon Gibsons theory. Also, a study carried Hahn, Anderson and Saidpour has demonstrated that regardless of which bod the participants were, they could tell direction and movement. And this finding goes against Gibsons idea of optic flow. Thus, Gibsons theory might not be right, instead, Gregorys theory might be more realistic.