Saturday, March 17, 2018

psychomytholoy part 4

Myth #4 Visual Perceptions Are Accompanied by Tiny Emissions from the Eyes Before reading on, take a look at the world around you. If you're inside, fixate on an object, like a chair, pen, or coffee mug; if you're outside, fixate on a tree, blade of grass, or cloud. Keep staring at it. Now answer this question: Is anything coming out of your eyes? This question may strike you as decidedly odd. Yet surveys demonstrate that large proportions of adults believe that our visual perceptions are accompanied by tiny emissions from our eyes (Winer, Cottrell, Gregg, Fournier, & Bica, 2002). Indeed, when researchers show college students diagrams that depict rays, waves, or particles coming either into the eye or coming out of the eye and ask them to pick the diagram that best describes visual perception, 41—67% select diagrams that show emissions emanating from the eye (Winer, Cottrell, Karefilaki. 1996). Even when researchers have shown college students cartoons of people's faces staring at an object and asked them to draw arrows to portra 69% drew arrows that showed visual energies emerging from the eyes (Winer & Cottrell, 1996b). These findings aren't an artifact of collegeilstuuents 110t understanding the drawings, because even when researchers ask them without any drawings whether or not the eye emits rays or particles that emanate it to seeNow answer this question: Is anything coming out of your eyes? This question may strike you as decidedly odd. Yet surveys demonstrate that large proportions of adults believe that our visual perceptions are accompanied by tiny emissions from our eyes (Winer, Cottrell, Gregg, Fournier, & Bica, 2002). Indeed, when researchers show college students diagrams that depict rays, waves, or particles coming either into the eye or coming out of the eye and ask them to pick the diagram that best describes visual perception, 41—67% select diagrams that show emissions emanating from the eye (Winer, Cottrell, Karefilaki, & Gregg, 1996). Even when researchers have shown college students cartoons of people's faces staring at an object and asked them to draw arrows to portray their vision, 69% drew arrows that showed visual energies emerging from the eyes (Winer & Cottrell, 1996b). These findings aren't an artifact of college students not understanding the drawings, because even when researchers ask them— without any drawings whether or not the eye emits rays or particles that enable it to see objects, many, often 30% or more, say that it does (Winer et al., 1996). As the great Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget (1929) noted, this belief begins early in life. Piaget even discussed the case of one child who believed that two people's looks can connect and "mix" when they meet each other. Consistent with Piaget's observations, 57% of elementary school children say that something comes out of the eye when people see (Cottrell & Winer, 1994; Winer & Cottrell, 1996a). This belief declines from the third to the eighth grade, but it remains widespread (Winer & Cottrell, 1996a). This "extramission theory" of vision dates back at least as far as Greek philosopher Plato (427—347 b.c.), who spoke of a "fire" that emanated from the eye during vision, which "coalesces with the daylight and causes the sensation we call seeing" (Gross, 1999). Later, Greek mathematician Euclid (circa 300 b.c.) described "rays proceeding from the eye" during vision. Although the Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 b.c.) rejected the extramission theory of vision, it remained popular for many centuries. Indeed. beliefs about the "evil eye" (mal Ojo) inflicting psychological harm on others have long been widespread in many countries, especially Mexico and those m the Mediterranean, Central America, and the Arab world (Bohigian, 1998; Gross, 1999; Machovec, 1976; Winer, Rader, & Cottrell, 2003). Both the Old and New testaments of the Bible refer to the evil eye, and ancient Egyptians applied eye shadow to ward off its sinister influence. Throughout the ages, poets wrote of the power of the eye to induce profound psychological effects, perhaps indirectly reflecting people's extramission beliefs (Gross, 1999). For example, Shakespeare penned that "A lover's eye will gaze an eagle blind." Even today, we speak of people giving us a "penetrating glance," a "piercing stare," or a "cutting look" (Winer & Cottrell, 1996a). Because of the representativeness heuristic (see Introduction, p. 15), we may over-generalize from these metaphors to the literal belief that the eye outputs energy. Interestingly, surveys suggest that 93% of college students have experienced the sense that they can "feel the stare of other eo le" (Cottrell, Winer, & Smith, 1996). Biologist Rupert Sheldrake (2003) even created a stir in the scientific community by conducting research purporting to show that many people c Chey'l"e being stared at by people they can't see, but a number of researchers have identified serious flaws in his studies, including the fact that Sheldrake's subjects may
(Cottrell, Winer, & Smith, 1996). Biologist Rupert Sheldrake (2003) even created a stir in the scientific community by conducting research purporting to show that many people can tell they're being stared at by people they can't see, but a number of researchers have identified serious flaws in his studies, including the fact that Sheldrake's subjects may have subtly influenced people to stare back at them (Marks & Colwell, 2000; Shermer, 2005). More recently, psychiatrist Colin Ross claimed that he can harness beams from his eyes to turn on a tone from a computer. Nevertheless, preliminary testing by a neurologist revealed that Ross' eyeblinks created a brain wave artifact that was inadvertently triggering the tone (False Memory Syndrome Foundation, 2008). Psychologists still don't understand why so many of us hold extramission beliefs, but they have a few tantalizing leads. First. popular culture, as exemplified by Superman's X-ray vision with its power to attack villains and slice through steel (Yang, 2007), may have contributed to some modern extramission beliefs, although this influence of course can't explain the origins of these beliefs in ancient culture (see Figure 1.1 j. Second, most of us have experienced "phosphenes," perceptions of light —often consisting of dots or pattems—created by excitation of the retina, the light-sensitive layer at the back of the eye (Neher, 1990). Pressure phosphenes, which we most often see after rubbing our eyes after awakening, are almost certainly the most common. Some writers have conjectured that phosphenes may contribute to the belief that the eye emits tiny particles to detect objects (Gross, 1999). Third, the eyes of many animals that possess good night vision contain a "tapetum lucidum," a reflective layer behind or within the retina. Many of us have seen the gleaming light generated by this layer, sometimes called "eyeshine," in cats or raccoons at night (Ollivier et al., 2004). Some have suggested that this experience may foster the misimpression that the eyes generate emissions (Yang, 2007). Nevertheless, all three speculations, although intriguing, are just that—speculations and none has been tested systematically. The reasons for extramission beliefs remain poorly understood (Winer et al., 2003). Can we modify extramission beliefs by education? At first blush, the answer appears to be "no." Remarkably, exposure to lectures on sensation and perception in introductory psychology courses seems to make no difference in the percentage of college students who endorse beliefs in extramission (Gregg, Whléi, Cottre Hedman, & Fournier, 2001; Wineret al., 2002). Nevertheless, there may be a "ray" of hope, if we can be forgiven for the pun. Research suggests college students with "refutational" messages, those designed not merely to explain how the eye works but how itdoesn't work, in this case that the ye doesn't
college students with "refutational" messages. those designed not merely to explain how the eye works but how it doesn 't work, in this case that the eye doesn't emit rays or particles, leads to short-term reductions in extramission beliefs (Winer et al., 2002). Even here, though, these reductions aren't especially long-lasting— they've largely dissipated by 3 to 5 months—suggesting that a one-shot exposure to a refutational message may not do the trick. Repeated exposure may be needed. In many respects. research on refutational messages mirrors the approach we're adopted throughout this book: first debunking the fictions about the mind and brain before unveiling the facts. As Mark Twain reminded us, learning often first requires unlearning. Superman's "X-ray vision" captures many people's intuitive beliefs regarding visual emissions. Source: Superman #37. O Hell

No comments: