James J. Gibson — is one of the most important psychologists of the 20th century, best known for his work on visual perception. He received his Ph. In his later works, including The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , Gibson became more philosophical and criticized cognitivism in the same way he had attacked behaviorism before, arguing strongly in favor of direct perception and direct realism, as opposed to cognitivist indirect realism. He termed his new approach "ecological psychology". Account Options Connexion. Psychology Press , 20 nov. This book, first published in , is about how we see: the environment around us its surfaces, their layout, and their colors and textures ; where we are in the environment; whether or not we are moving and, if we are, where we are going; what things are good for; how to do things to thread a needle or drive an automobile ; or why things look as they do.
The Animal and the Environment. The Meaningful Environment. Above all there is the Susan Linn Sage Professor of Psychology at Cornell who worked very hard on this book, even if she idid aSM write it She is married to me, and we share responsibility for important decisions. Any errors in this book that remain atre her fault as much as mine. How do we see the environment around us?
How do we see its surfaces, their layout, and their colors and textures?
How do we see where we are in the environment? How do we see what things are good for? How do we see how to do things, to thread a needle or drive an automobile? Why do things look as ikef do? This book is a sequel to The Perception of the Visual World, which came out in It is rather difierent, however, because my explanation of vision was then based on the retinal image, whereas it is now based on what I call the ambient optic array. I now believe we must take an ecological approach to the problems of perception.
We are told that vision depends on the eye, which is connected to the brain. I shall suggest Aat natifral vision depends on the eyes in the head on a botiy supported by the ground, the brain being only the central organ of a complete visual system. When no constraints are put on the visual system, we look around, walk up to something interestftig and move around it so as to see it from all sides, and go from one vista to another.
That is natural vision, and that is what this book is about. The textbooks and handbooks assume that vision is simplest when the eye is held still, as a camera has to be, so that a picture is formed that can be tratfSmitted to the brain. Vision is studied by first requiring the subject to fixate a point and then exposing momentarily a stimulus or a pattern of stimuli around the fixation point.
Hhe investigafeet S S! It also, of course, prevents him from getting up and walking around, which provides ambulatory vision. Are these forms of visionf I suggest they arej in fact, they are the kind of vision we need in life, not just pictorial depth peroeption.
We need to-see all Hie way around at a given point of observation and to take different points of observation. The crux of the matter is whether or not natural vision is compounded of units like the snapshot. I very much doullt that vision is simplest when the experimenter tries to mske 3ie eye work as if it were a photographic camera, even the kind thdt takes pictures in rapfd succession.
But note that if an animal has eyes at all it swivels its head around and it goes from place to place. The single, frozen field of view provides only impoverished information about the world.
Birt I of this book is about the environment to be pereeived. Part II is abbut itie information for perception. Part III is about the activity of perception.
Finally, Part IV is about pictures and the special kinds of awareness that go with looking at them. Picture vision comes last because it can be understood only after we are clear about ambient vision and ambulatory vision. First, the environment must be described, since what there is to be perceived has to be stiinilated 'before one can even talk about perceiving it.
This is not the world of physics but the world at the level of ecology. Second, the information available for perception in an illuminated medium must be described. This is not just light for stimulating' rec pteirs but the information in the light that can activate the system.
The History and Philosophy of Ecological Psychology
Ecological optics is required instead of classical optics. Third and only here do we come to what is called psychology proper , the process of perception must be described. The old idea that sensory inputs are converted into perceptions by operations of the mind is rejected. A radically new way of thinking about perception is proposed. Actually, it is a new approach to the whole field of psychology, for it involves rejecting the stimulus-response forntula.
This notion, borrowed from the so-called hard science of physiology, helped to get rid of the doctrine of the soul in psychology, but it never really worked.
What psychology needs is the kind of thinking that is beginning to be attempted in what is loosely called systems theory. There is no central core of theoretical concepts on which to base it.
The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition - James J. Gibson - Google 圖書
The right conceptual level has not yet been found. A few psychologists, such as E. Brunswik and R. Barker , have moved in this direction, but none has ended with the sort of theory being put forward here. The great virtue of the headrest, the bite-board, the exposure device, the tachis- toscope, the durktoorii with its points cff light, and the laboratory vwth its carefiilly drawn pictorial stimuli was that they made it possible to study vision experimentally.
The only way to be sure an observer sees what he says he does is to set up an experimental situation and check him out. Experimental verification can be trusted. These controls, however, made it seem as if snapshot vision and aperture vision were the whole of it, or at least the only vision that could be studied. But, on the contrary, natural vision can be studied expeirimetrtally. The experilflgifis to be reported in Part III on perception involve the providing of optical information instead of the imposing of optical stimulation. It is not true that "the laboratory can never be like life.
It has to be admitted that the controlled displaying of information is vastly more difficult than the controlled applying of stimulation. Other students of information-based perception are at work, bdt the facts have not yet been accumulated. The vast quantity of experimental research in the textbooks and handbooks is concerned with snapshot vision, fixed-eye vision, or aperture vision, and it is not relevant, I do assure my readecs that I know this body of research.
I have even contributed to it. But they will have to take my word for it. GAirrtiAriieal space is a puffe abstraction.
Outer space can be visualized but cannot be seen. The cues for depth refer only to paintings, nothing more. The visual third dimension is a misapplication of Descaites's notion of three axes for a coortilnate system. The doctrine that we could not perceive the world around us unless we already had the concept of space is nonsense. It is quite the other way around: We could not conceive df empty space uflless we could see the ground under our feet and the sky above.
Space is a myth, a ghost, a fiction for geometers. All that sounds very strange, no doubt, but I urge the reader to entertain the hypothesis. For if you agree to abandon the dogma that "percepts without concepts are blind," as Kant put it, a deep theoretical mess, a genuine quagmire, will dry up. This is one of the main themes of the chapters that follow.
Browse more videos
These are the facts of ophthalmology and optometry and the psychophysiology of vision at the level of cells. They are perfectly good facts, and they have their place. They are much better known than the facts with which this book is concerned, and their scientific status is sxich that those persons who specialize in them assume with conftdeflee that physical and physiological optics provide the only basis for visual perception. But those persons have no conception of the perplexities to which their assumption leads.