Holes and wholes: A reply to Rubin and Kanwisher
- 1 January 1990
- journal article
- Published by Springer Nature in Perception & Psychophysics
- Vol. 47 (1) , 47-53
- https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03208163
Abstract
This paper, contrary to skepticism about the human ability to perceive topological properties, addresses some commonly heard nontopological counterexplanations and provides evidence to rule out these apparent counterexamples against the topological hypothesis. Data from improved control conditions show that the reason why these counterexamples seem inconsistent with the topological hypothesis is that they fail to take due account of two factors: visibility, and organization other than physical connectedness.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Topological Structure in the Perception of Apparent MotionPerception, 1985
- Topological perception: Holes in an experimentPerception & Psychophysics, 1985
- Topological Structure in Visual PerceptionScience, 1982
- Perception of wholes and of their component parts: Some configural superiority effects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1977
- Perception of wholes and of their component parts: Some configural superiority effects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1977
- Visual Functions After Removal of the Occipital LobesThe Journal of Psychology, 1941