The role of selective attention in perceptual switching
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When viewing ambiguous figures, individuals can exert selective attentional control over their perceptual reversibility behaviour (e.g., Strüber & Stadler, 1999). In the current study, we replicated this finding but we also found that ambiguous figures containing faces are processed quite differently from those containing objects. Furthermore, inverting an ambiguous figure containing faces (i.e., Rubinâs vase-face) resulted in an âinversion effectâ. These findings highlight the importance of considering how we attend to faces in addition to how we perceive and process faces. Describing the perceptual reversal patterns of individuals in the general population allowed us to draw comparisons to behaviours exhibited by individuals with Asperger Syndrome (AS). The group data suggested that these individuals were less affected by figure type or stimulus inversion. Examination of individual scores, moreover, revealed that the majority of participants with AS showed an atypical reversal pattern, particularly with ambiguous figures containing faces, and an atypical inversion effect. Together, our results show that ambiguous figures can be a very valuable tool for examining face processing mechanisms in the general population and other distinct groups of individuals, particularly those diagnosed with AS.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".