Cognitive Psychology seminars

Filmmakers and editors have empirically developed techniques to ensure the spatiotemporal continuity of a film's narration. In terms of time, editing techniques (e.g., elliptical, overlapping, or cut minimization) allow for the manipulation of the perceived duration of events as they unfold on screen. More specifically, a scene can be edited to be time compressed, expanded, or real-time in terms of its perceived duration. Despite the consistent application of these techniques in filmmaking, their perceptual outcomes have not been experimentally validated. Given that viewing a film is experienced as a precise simulation of the physical world, the use of cinematic material to examine aspects of time perception allows for experimentation with high ecological validity, while filmmakers gain more insight on how empirically developed techniques influence viewers' time percept. Here, we investigated how such time manipulation techniques of an action affect a scene's perceived duration. Specifically, we presented videos depicting different actions (e.g., a woman talking on the phone), edited according to the techniques applied for temporal manipulation and asked participants to make verbal estimations of the presented scenes' perceived durations. Analysis of data revealed that the duration of expanded scenes was significantly overestimated as compared to that of compressed and real-time scenes, as was the duration of real-time scenes as compared to that of compressed scenes. Therefore, our results validate the empirical techniques applied for the modulation of a scene's perceived duration. We also found interactions on time estimates of scene type and editing technique as a function of the characteristics and the action of the scene presented. Thus, these findings add to the discussion that the content and characteristics of a scene, along with the editing technique applied, can also modulate perceived duration. Our findings are discussed by considering current timing frameworks, as well as attentional saliency algorithms measuring the visual saliency of the presented stimuli.

Using videos from the Deepfake Detection Challenge (cf. Groh et al., 2021), we investigated human deepfake detection performance (DDP) in two unique observer groups: Super-Recognizers (SRs) and "normal" officers from within the 18K members of the Berlin Police. SRs were identified either via previously proposed lab-based procedures (Ramon, 2021) or the only existing tool for SR identification involving increasingly challenging, authentic forensic material: beSure® (Berlin Test For Super-Recognizer Identification; Ramon & Rjosk, 2022). Across two experiments we examined deepfake detection performance (DDP) in participants who judged single videos and pairs of videos in a 2AFC decision setting. We explored speed-accuracy trade-offs in DDP, compared DDP between lab-identified SRs and non-SRs, and police officers whose face identity processing skills had been extensively tested using challenging. In this talk I will discuss our surprising findings and argue that further work is needed too determine whether face identity processing is related to DDP or not.

In the real world, object arrangement follows a number of rules. Some of the rules pertain to the spatial relations between objects and scenes (i.e., syntactic rules) and others about the contextual relations (i.e., semantic rules). Research has shown that violation of semantic rules influences interval timing with the duration of scenes containing such violations to be overestimated as compared to scenes with no violations. However, no study has yet investigated whether both semantic and syntactic violations can affect timing in the same way. Furthermore, it is unclear whether the effect of scene violations on timing is due to attentional or other cognitive accounts. Using an oddball paradigm and real-world scenes with or without semantic and syntactic violations, we conducted two experiments on whether time dilation will be obtained in the presence of any type of scene violation and the role of attention in any such effect. Our results from Experiment 1 showed that time dilation indeed occurred in the presence of syntactic violations, while time compression was observed for semantic violations. In Experiment 2, we further investigated whether these estimations were driven by attentional accounts, by utilizing a contrast manipulation of the target objects. The results showed that an increased contrast led to duration overestimation for both semantic and syntactic oddballs. Together, our results indicate that scene violations differentially affect timing due to violation processing differences and, moreover, their effect on timing seems to be sensitive to attentional manipulations such as target contrast.

Working memory is about the past but for the future. Adopting such a future-focused perspective shifts the narrative of working memory as a limited-capacity storage system to working memory as an anticipatory buffer that helps us prepare for potential and sequential upcoming behaviour. In my talk, I will present a series of our recent studies that have started to reveal emerging principles of a working memory that looks forward – highlighting, amongst others, how selective attention plays a vital role in prioritising internal contents for behaviour, and the bi-directional links between visual working memory and action. These studies show how studying the dynamics of working memory, selective attention, and action together paves way for an integrated understanding of how mind serves behaviour.

Despite her still poor visual acuity and minimal visual experience, a 2-3 month old baby will reliably respond to facial expressions, smiling back at her caretaker or older sibling. But what if that same baby had been deprived of her early visual experience? Will she be able to appropriately respond to seemingly mundane interactions, such as a peer’s facial expression, if she begins seeing at the age of 10? My work is part of Project Prakash, a dual humanitarian/scientific mission to identify and treat curably blind children in India and then study how their brain learns to make sense of the visual world when their visual journey begins late in life. In my talk, I will give a brief overview of Project Prakash, and present findings from one of my primary lines of research: plasticity of face perception with late sight onset. Specifically, I will discuss a mixed methods effort to probe and explain the differential windows of plasticity that we find across different aspects of distributed face recognition, from distinguishing a face from a nonface early in the developmental trajectory, to recognizing facial expressions, identifying individuals, and even identifying one’s own caretaker. I will draw connections between our empirical findings and our recent theoretical work hypothesizing that children with late sight onset may suffer persistent face identification difficulties because of the unusual acuity progression they experience relative to typically developing infants. Finally, time permitting, I will point to potential implications of our findings in supporting newly-sighted children as they transition back into society and school, given that their needs and possibilities significantly change upon the introduction of vision into their lives.

Visual perception is traditionally studied in isolation from other sensory systems, and while this approach has been exceptionally successful, in the real world, visual objects are often accompanied by sounds, smells, tactile information, or taste. How is visual processing influenced by these other sensory inputs? In this talk, I will review studies from our lab showing that a sound can influence the perception of a visual object in multiple ways. In the first part, I will focus on spatial interactions between sound and sight, demonstrating that co-localized sounds enhance visual perception. Then, I will show that these cross-modal interactions also occur at a higher contextual and semantic level, where naturalistic sounds facilitate the processing of real-world objects that match these sounds. Throughout my talk I will explore to what extent sounds not only improve visual processing but also alter perceptual representations of the objects we see. Most broadly, I will argue for the importance of considering multisensory influences on visual perception for a more complete understanding of our visual experience.

Vocabulary learning applications like Duolingo have millions of users around the world, but yet are based on very simple heuristics to choose teaching material to provide to their users. In this presentation, we will discuss the possibility to develop more advanced artificial teachers, which would be based on modeling of the learner’s inner characteristics. In the case of teaching vocabulary, understanding how the learner memorizes is enough. When it comes to picking grammar exercises, it becomes essential to assess how the learner reasons, in particular by analogy. This second application will illustrate how analogical and case-based reasoning can be employed in an alternative way in education: not as the teaching algorithm, but as a part of the learner’s model.

Our ability to perceive the world around us can be affected by a number of factors including the nature of the external information, prior experience of the environment, and the integrity of the underlying perceptual system. A particular challenge for the brain is to maintain a coherent perception from information encoded by the peripheral sensory organs whose function is affected by typical, developmental changes across the lifespan. Yet, how the brain adapts to the maturation of the senses, as well as experiential changes in the multisensory environment, is poorly understood. Over the past few years, we have used a range of multisensory tasks to investigate the role of ageing on the brain’s ability to merge sensory inputs. In particular, we have embedded an audio-visual task based on the sound-induced flash illusion (SIFI) into a large-scale, longitudinal study of ageing. Our findings support the idea that the temporal binding window (TBW) is modulated by age and reveal important individual differences in this TBW that may have clinical implications. However, our investigations also suggest the TWB is experience-dependent with evidence for both long and short term behavioural plasticity. An overview of these findings, including recent evidence on how multisensory integration may be associated with higher order functions, will be discussed.

Visual perceptual learning (VPL) is defined as improved performance on a visual task due to visual experience. It was once argued that attention to a visual feature is necessary for VPL of the feature to occur. Contrary to this view, a phenomenon called task-irrelevant VPL demonstrated that VPL can occur due to exposure to a feature which is sub-threshold and task-irrelevant, and therefore, unattended. A series of findings based on task-irrelevant VPL has indicated the following two mechanisms. First, attention to a feature facilitates VPL of the feature while inhibiting VPL of unattended and supra-threshold features. Second, reward paired with a feature enables VPL of the feature irrespective of whether the feature is attended or not. However, we recently found an additional twist; VPL of a task-irrelevant and supra-threshold feature embedded in a natural scene is not subject to the inhibition of attention. This new finding suggests a need to revise the current view or add a new mechanism as to how VPL occurs.

Visual comparisons are ubiquitous, and they can also be an important source for learning (e.g., Gentner et al., 2016; Kok et al., 2013). In science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), key information is often conveyed through figures, graphs, and diagrams (Mayer, 1993). Comparing within and across visuals is critical for gleaning insight into the underlying concepts, structures, and processes that they represent. This talk addresses how people make visual comparisons and how visual comparisons can be best supported to improve learning. In particular, the talk will present a series of studies exploring the Spatial Alignment Principle (Matlen et al., 2020), derived from Structure-Mapping Theory (Gentner, 1983). Structure-mapping theory proposes that comparisons involve a process of finding correspondences between elements based on structured relationships. The Spatial Alignment Principle suggests that spatially arranging compared figures directly – to support correct correspondences and minimize interference from incorrect correspondences – will facilitate visual comparisons. We find that direct placement can facilitate visual comparison in educationally relevant stimuli, and that it may be especially important when figures are less familiar. We also present complementary evidence illustrating the preponderance of visual comparisons in 7th grade science textbooks.

Several lines of research have demonstrated that internally generated sensory experience - such as during memory, dreaming and mental imagery - activates similar neural representations as externally triggered perception. This overlap raises a fundamental challenge: how is the brain able to keep apart signals reflecting imagination and reality? In a series of online psychophysics experiments combined with computational modelling, we investigated to what extent imagination and perception are confused when the same content is simultaneously imagined and perceived. We found that simultaneous congruent mental imagery consistently led to an increase in perceptual presence responses, and that congruent perceptual presence responses were in turn associated with a more vivid imagery experience. Our findings can be best explained by a simple signal detection model in which imagined and perceived signals are added together. Perceptual reality monitoring can then easily be implemented by evaluating whether this intermixed signal is strong or vivid enough to pass a ‘reality threshold’. Our model suggests that, in contrast to self-generated sensory changes during movement, our brain does not discount self-generated sensory signals during mental imagery. This has profound implications for our understanding of reality monitoring and perception in general.

Natural behavior reveals the way that gaze serves the needs of the current task, and the complex cognitive control mechanisms that are involved. It has become increasingly clear that even the simplest actions involve complex decision processes that depend on an interaction of visual information, knowledge of the current environment, and the intrinsic costs and benefits of actions choices. I will explore these ideas in the context of walking in natural terrain, where we are able to recover the 3D structure of the visual environment. We show that subjects choose flexible paths that depend on the flatness of the terrain over the next few steps. Subjects trade off flatness with straightness of their paths towards the goal, indicating a nuanced trade-off between stability and energetic costs on both the time scale of the next step and longer-range constraints.

The talk will give a tour of Guided Search 6.0 (GS6), the latest evolution of the Guided Search model of visual search. Part 1 describes The Mechanics of Search. Because we cannot recognize more than a few items at a time, selective attention is used to prioritize items for processing. Selective attention to an item allows its features to be bound together into a representation that can be matched to a target template in memory or rejected as a distractor. The binding and recognition of an attended object is modeled as a diffusion process taking > 150 msec/item. Since selection occurs more frequently than that, it follows that multiple items are undergoing recognition at the same time, though asynchronously, making GS6 a hybrid serial and parallel model. If a target is not found, search terminates when an accumulating quitting signal reaches a threshold. Part 2 elaborates on the five sources of Guidance that are combined into a spatial “priority map” to guide the deployment of attention (hence “guided search”). These are (1) top-down and (2) bottom-up feature guidance, (3) prior history (e.g. priming), (4) reward, and (5) scene syntax and semantics. Finally, in Part 3, we will consider the internal representation of what we are searching for; what is often called “the search template”. That search template is really two templates: a guiding template (probably in working memory) and a target template (in long term memory). Put these pieces together and you have GS6.