Effects of grouping and attention on the perception of causality

Beyond perceiving patterns of motion in simple dynamic displays, we can also perceive higher level properties, such ascausality, as when we see one object collide with another object. Although causality is a seemingly high-level property, its perception—like the perception of faces or speech—often appears to be automatic, irresistible, and driven by highly constrained and stimulus-driven rules. Here, in an exploration of such rules, we demonstrate that perceptual grouping and attention can influence the both perception of causality in ambiguous displays. We first report several types of grouping effects, based on connectedness, proximity, and common motion. We further suggest that such grouping effects are mediated by the allocation of attention, and we directly demonstrate that causal perception can be strengthened or attenuated on the basis of where observers are attending, independent of fixation. Like Michotte, we find that the perception of causality is mediated by strict visual rules. Beyond Michotte, we find that these rules operate not only over discrete objects, but also over perceptual groups, constrained by the allocation of attention.

[1]  M. Yela Phenomenal Causation at a Distance , 1952 .

[2]  A. Gemelli,et al.  The influence of the subject's attitude in perception , 1958 .

[3]  H. Wallach The perception of motion. , 1959, Scientific American.

[4]  D. Boyle A Contribution to the Study of Phenomenal Causation* , 1960 .

[5]  T. Natsoulas Principles of momentum and kinetic energy in the perception of causality. , 1961, The American journal of psychology.

[6]  A. Michotte The perception of causality , 1963 .

[7]  David Hume A Treatise of Human Nature: Being an Attempt to introduce the experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects , 1972 .

[8]  J. Nelson,et al.  Orientation-selective inhibition from beyond the classic visual receptive field , 1978, Brain Research.

[9]  S. Weir The Perception of Motion: Michotte Revisited , 1978 .

[10]  V. S. Ramachandran,et al.  Perceptual organization in moving patterns , 1983, Nature.

[11]  J Allman,et al.  Direction- and Velocity-Specific Responses from beyond the Classical Receptive Field in the Middle Temporal Visual Area (MT) , 1985, Perception.

[12]  A. Leslie 12 Getting Development off the Ground , 1986 .

[13]  A. Leslie,et al.  Do six-month-old infants perceive causality? , 1987, Cognition.

[14]  R. Day,et al.  Perceived Causality Occurs with Stroboscopic Movement of One or Both Stimulus Elements , 1990, Perception.

[15]  D. Shanks,et al.  Evidence for a Distinction between Judged and Perceived Causality , 1992, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[16]  N. Anderson,et al.  An information integration approach to phenomenal causality , 1993, Memory & cognition.

[17]  I Rock,et al.  On the nature and order of organizational processing: A reply to Peterson , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[18]  M. Morris,et al.  Culture and Cause: American and Chinese Attributions for Social and Physical Events , 1994 .

[19]  P. White The Understanding of Causation and the Production of Action , 1995 .

[20]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Attentional resolution and the locus of visual awareness , 1996, Nature.

[21]  J. Kruschke,et al.  The perception of causality: Feature binding in interacting objects , 1996 .

[22]  J. B. Levitt,et al.  Contrast dependence of contextual effects in primate visual cortex , 1997, nature.

[23]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Attentional resolution , 1997, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[24]  P. White,et al.  Phenomenal causality: impressions of pulling in the visual perception of objects in motion. , 1997, The American journal of psychology.

[25]  Z. Pylyshyn Is vision continuous with cognition? The case for cognitive impenetrability of visual perception. , 1999, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[26]  Alan B. Milne,et al.  Impressions of enforced disintegration and bursting in the visual perception of collision events , 1999 .

[27]  Csaba Veres,et al.  The perceived intentionality of groups , 1999, Cognition.

[28]  A. Schlottmann Is perception of causality modular? , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[29]  Patrice D. Tremoulet,et al.  Perceptual causality and animacy , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[30]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  Mechanisms of visual attention in the human cortex. , 2000, Annual review of neuroscience.

[31]  S. Shimojo,et al.  When Sound Affects Vision: Effects of Auditory Grouping on Visual Motion Perception , 2001, Psychological science.

[32]  T. Hubbard,et al.  Representational momentum and Michotte's (1946/1963) "launching effect" paradigm. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[33]  Refractor Vision , 2000, The Lancet.

[34]  J. Driver,et al.  Segmentation, attention and phenomenal visual objects , 2001, Cognition.

[35]  B. Scholl Objects and attention: the state of the art , 2001, Cognition.

[36]  K. Nakayama,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article CAUSAL CAPTURE: Contextual Effects on the Perception of Collision Events , 2022 .

[37]  A. Schlottmann,et al.  Perceptual causality in children. , 2002, Child development.

[38]  N. Troje,et al.  Audiovisual phenomenal causality , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[39]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Attention and Visual Object Segmentation , 2004 .

[40]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Illusory Causal Crescents: Misperceived Spatial Relations Due to Perceived Causality , 2004, Perception.

[41]  P. White Visual causal impressions in the perception of several moving objects , 2005 .