Unit 1 lesson 1 reading techniques

Exercise 1. Match the figures to the text. Use the context, visual clues and word derivation.

1. Some of the problems of seeing three-dimensional forms on a two-dimensional surface are illustrated by the “impossible figure”. This drawing appears as a U at the bottom, but has three prongs at the top. Incompatible information is given to the eyes and the brain cannot decide how to interpret it.

2. Organizing stimuli into “figure” and “ground” is basic to stimulus patterning, even thought the figure and ground may reverse from one moment to the next. The reversible goblet is a demonstration of a figure-ground reversal. Note that either the light portion (the goblet) or the dark portion (two profiles) can be perceived as a figure against a background and seems more solid and well-defined.

3. The figure in the center is ambiguous, and the way we see it depends on whether we look from left to right or from top to bottom. It illustrates the role of context in perception. The center of the figure can be seen either as the letter B or the number 13, depending on the context in which it appears.

4. As you study the figure, you will see that your perception of it changes. You will find that the surface sometimes appears as the front of the figure and sometimes as the back. Once you have observed the cube change perspective, it will jump back and forth between the two perspectives without any effort on your part. In fact you will probably find it impossible to maintain a steady fixation on only one aspect of the transparent cube. The illusion was devised in 1832 by the Swiss naturalist L.A. Necker.

Fig. A Fig. B Fig. C Fig. D

Exercise 2. In the following text several words have been taken out. Read the text carefully and supply the missing words from the list below.

CONTEXT AND EXPERIENCE

Textbooks on … are filled with examples demonstrating that the same … can give rise to different percepts, depending on the … in which it is observed and the past … of the observer. Figure D illustrates the role of … in perception. The center of the figure can be seen … as the letter B … the number 13, depending on the … in which it appears. Similarly past experience influences perceptual hypotheses we form when we see something for the … time. Remember the ambiguous drawing of the young woman/old woman. On first viewing, about 65 … of people report seeing a pretty young woman, and 35 … see an unattractive … woman. But if we first show a group of subjects a set of unambiguous pictures all depicting … women and then show them the … picture, they almost always see it as a young woman. The … can be demonstrated by first showing subjects a set of … all showing … women.

(stimulus, first, either, context, reverse, or, ambiguous, old, perception, pictures, young, percept, experience)

Lesson 2. Text study

Exercise 1. The text you are going to read describes the group of experiments on perception. Before reading decide whether the following statements are true or false.

a). Experiments help to make the matter plain (to clear out the matter).

b). Color photography is a biological process.

c). Satiated people see less clearly than hungry or thirsty people.

d). A person is more sensitive to changes in light than a camera.

e). Human perception is mysterious and unpredictable.

Exercise 2. Now read the text to find out whether you were right. Choose the title that best suits it:

a). Strange experiments.

b). Vision versus color photography.

c). Perception.

TEXT

When thinking about biological processes it is often helpful to consider some apparently similar yet better understood non-biological processes. In the case of visual perception an obvious choice would be color photography. Since in many respects eyes resemble cameras, and percepts photographs, is it not reasonable to assume that perception is a sort of photographic process by which samples of the external world become spontaneously and accurately reproduced somewhere inside out heads? Unfortunately, the answer must be no. The best that can be said of the photographic analogy is that it points up what perception is not. Beyond this it is superficial (несерьезный, поверхностный) and misleading. Four simple experiments should make the matter plain (ясный).

In the first a person is asked to match a pair of white and black discs, which are rotating (вращаться) at such a speed as to make them appear uniformly gray. One disc is standing in shadow, the other in bright illumination. By adjusting the ratio of black to white in one of the discs the subject tries to make it look the same as the other. The results show him to be remarkably accurate, for it seems he has made the proportion of black to white in the brightly illuminated disc almost identical with that in the disc which stood in the shadow. But there is nothing photographic about his perception, for when the matched discs, still spinning, are photographed, the resulting print shows them to be quite dissimilar in appearance. The disc in shadow is obviously very much darker than the other one.

What has happened? Both the camera and the person were accurate, but their criteria differed. One might say that the camera recorded things as they look, and the person things as they are. But the situation is manifestly (явно, очевидно) more complex than this, for the person also recorded things as they look. He did better than the camera because he made them look as they really are. He was not misled by the differences in illumination. He showed perceptual constancy. If it were not for an extremely rapid, wholly unconscious piece of computation, he would not have received a more accurate record of the external world that the camera.

In the second experiment a person is asked to match with a color card the colors of two pictures in dim illumination. One is of a leaf, the other of a donkey. Both are colored an equal shade of green. In making his match he chooses a much stronger green for the leaf than for the donkey, the leaf evidently looks greener than the donkey. The percipient makes perceptual world compatible with his own experience. It hardly needs saying that cameras lack this versatility.

In the third experiment hungry, thirsty and satiated people are asked to equalize the brightness of pictures depicting food, water and other objects unrelated to hunger or thirst. When the intensities at which they set the pictures are measured it is found that hungry people see pictures relating to food as brighter than the rest (i.e. to equalize the pictures they make the food ones less intense), and thirsty people do likewise with ‘drink’ pictures. For the satiated group no differences are obtained between the different objects. In other words, perception serves to satisfy needs, not to enrich subjective experience. Unlike a photograph the percept is determined by more than just a stimulus.

(to be continued in Exercise 15)

Notes:

inthecaseof– что касается, в отношении

inmanyrespects– во многих отношениях, во многом

an obvious choice would be (modal verb expressing “belief”) – вероятно, по-видимому

beyondthis– в остальном

dolikewise– поступают подобным же образом

Exercise 3. Read the text again. Single out the main problems raised choosing the correct ending for each point.

• In the first paragraph, the author suggests that

1. color photography is a biological process.

2. vision is rather like color photography.

3. vision is a sort of photographic process.

4. vision and color photography are very different.

• In the first experiment it is proved that a person

1. makes mistakes of perception and is less accurate than a camera.

2. can see more clearly than a camera.

3. is more sensitive to changes in light than a camera.

4. Sees colors as they are in spite of changes in the light.

• The second experiment shows that

1. people see colors according to their ideas of how things should look.

2. colors look different in a dim light.

3. cameras work less efficiently in a dim light.

4. colors are less intense in larger objects.

• The third experiment proves that

1. we see things differently according to our interest in them.

2. pictures of food and drinks are especially interesting to everybody.

3. cameras are not good at equalizing brightness.

4. satiated people see less clearly than hungry or thirsty people.

• The group of experiments, taken together, prove the human perception is

1. unreliable.

2. mysterious and unpredictable.

3. less accurate than a camera.

4. related to our knowledge, experience and needs.