I want to present you with a possible particular concrete example (instance) of a perceptual shift, i.e. the inception of a stage shift (in 'seeing' and [at first, very vaguely,] in some sense IN cognition), showing all the 4 phases of a perceptual shift for the overall process of the beginning of a qualitative stage shift part of the development of cognition -- before purely associative learning "holds sway" by itself again.
This hypothetical example comes from the ape (gorilla) social "world", from which our abilities to have progressively developing levels of concepts and thinking likely first evolved. Well, HERE IS IS:
Think of an child ape, not an infant but perhaps a mid-age-child individual. He has from his previous development a conceptual idea of the dominant (adult) male gorilla (and his behavior patterns, relating to this).
But, then he "notices" that this dominant male, at times rushes towards other adults, to seemingly show other ways to express his dominance (or other aspects of that dominance) which he has not shown before (or which the young ape has not clearly seen, noticed, or processed before).
This is the kind of thing indicating [with him, this child] innate guidance, given he has good, refined earlier knowledge: AT FIRST BEING some gap in the child ape's conceptual understanding of the OVERALL structure of this adult dominance behavior. That "gap", (phase 1) of the now first-emerging of a NEW perceptual shift, may show itself in a situation (or early situations) as just something involving automatically vaguely orienting TOWARD the key situation and behaviors (and would be shown behaviorally simply in prolonged gaze when/after this dominance phenomenon shows itself).
Soon (perhaps VERY SOON) he will better see such dominance events WHEN THEY OCCUR (because of the specific "gap" existing in his understanding); this second phase (of the perceptual shift) will show clearly: orienting to the aspects of this new-to-understand type of dominance expression (still, for the most part, not conscious).
In the third phase of the shift, he will reliably have seen regularities as he continues good orientation needed to observe things associated with this dominance event. HERE he can be said to be expressly and explicitly and consciously ATTENDING to occurrences of this event.
Finally (in the fourth phase of the shift) he will integrate the essentials into memory: facts-for-occurrence, key aspects of this dominant male's behavior (with respect to dominance behavior patterns), and key aspects of the spacial and temporal aspects ("in the world"), associated with these dominance behaviors pattern's key content in visual-spacial memory (which he will be able to play back in his mind, when NOT present in the situation where the adult male dominance behavior occurs; i.e. he can "reflect"). BUT, TO DO ALL THIS:
This fourth phase shows the development of some fact/declarative memory (basically the main static features of the dominance act and their relationships to each other, defined) -- this is the declarative/"semantic" aspect of long-term memory he has developed and is developing. Also, some procedural knowledge develops (at the same time) about how to act in response to this dominance expression (especially if his has something "to do" with he, himself): this thoroughly developed, active and automatized response (or set of responses) is the procedural aspect of long-term memory he has gained: this aspect, known as procedural memory.
Also, in the fourth phase FOR THE MOST PART, he has a record-of-incident (episode) memory which is most prominently in the visual-spacial memory which is, in an indirect way, the actual thing he is able to play back key portions of in his mind, just as he sits and thinks about this dominance phenomenon -- given the EPISODIC BUFFER. (Other key aspects [mentioned above] of long-term Memories are also determining the nature of the BUFFER and are "there". ) So, the ability to do this out-of the situation reflection, just described above, relies on (and is delimited by) the content that will be a notable part of his EPISODIC BUFFER, doing some major contextualization of his working memory (entering into it) where further, now more-simple associative learning may now continue to occur, until all the Memories (each and together) are thoroughly refined.
He no doubt will also, through cued thinking (and likely some observation) relate this aspect of his concept of dominance to other aspects at the same conceptual level (and to/with earlier conceptual levels) that are related to shows of dominance. When ALL this (all of the 4 phases and associative learning needed for refinements and concept integration) has occurred (perhaps taking a year), he will be ready to notice other greater patterns BY HAVING a new perceptual shift (that, too, with 4 similar phases) -- these are the core foundational happenings in ontogeny (aka THE proximate directly observable causes of the development of behavior patterns via perceptual shifts) and that which AGAIN allows qualitative NEW learning new ways (using a qualitatively different kind of learning, and also using well-refined aspects from earlier stages): to AGAIN further develop his representation system(s)( aka concept structure), this being related to all major aspects of the Memories and likely mostly connected with through visual-spacial memories, and all the other Memories connected to that AND USED (in the final step of cognizance) BY THE EPISODIC BUFFER; then working memory can work on new "things".
[ Full explication and justification for this approach (and the implications of this approach) can be found via :
Article A Human Ethogram: Its Scientific Acceptability and Importanc...
and
Book NOW the nearly complete collection of essays (RIGHT HERE) _B...
]
I should note that this perspective can be seen as finishing Piaget's theory (and that of neo-Piagetians), by defining the stage shifts (associated with Equilibration 2, qualitatively described, ONLY, by Piaget, BUT something he clearly indicates is not accomplished with regular accommodation). In fact, Piaget just stated the real major factor behind the main stage changes was "maturation". Unfortunately, most psychologists completely overlook statements about Equilibration 2 and either do not know of it or totally neglect to mention it in any regard. In any case: THEY NEGLECT TO SEE THE STARK FACT OF THE LACK OF EXPLANATION HERE, which Piaget MORE than clearly stated; they somehow (often, and maybe always, adding in fictional executive and meta processes) explain cognitive developments just with assimilation and accommodation -- BUT THIS WAS NOT PIAGET'S VIEW (he had a qualitative idea of the situation and nature of things that would yield the need for big change: Equilibration 2, after previous developments have been well-refined), BUT PROVIDED THEN ONLY "MATURATION", otherwise, as an explanation and that is all (he would himself have seen, and DID see, his theory as empirically incomplete).
Thus, this perspective and approach is congruent IN THE MAIN with the Piagetian perspectives and all neo-Piagetian perspectives, just adding in the discoverable needed processes (and resulting in a way to throw out all those "meta" processes, because they are not only not well-founded, but they are not needed for explanation). Once these fictional (though on the "face of it" seeming totally descriptive) processes are eliminated, my perspective and approach is basically consistent with neo-Piagetian theories.
One returns to the empiricism of direct observation to substantiate these "perceptual shift" hypotheses, something Piaget would be very happy with. AND: We now also have the tools of eye-tracking and computer assisted analysis technologies to allow us to DISCOVER (see) what researchers previously could not. Researchers, today, with the new procedures now available should look for and see if they can find the overt phenomenon (though subtle) associated with my empirically hypothesized, directly observable phases of the "perceptual shifts".
If only today's theorists could recall or review Piaget and see that JUST THIS is what was and IS mainly missing (and otherwise just modifying some accounts because the "perceptual shifts" testable and provable findings will have some implications on the descriptions of other processes/mechanisms, but those otherwise and mainly being almost phenomenologically correct ).
Good citation for Piaget's position: HIS LAST BOOK, its on Equilibration (NOT A FINISHED MATTER); in there also the 2 types of equilibration are clearly described, and very different
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Science and Engineering
- Artificial Intelligence