![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
anhinga_anhinga"The paper suggests that language affects perception in the right half of the visual field, but much less, if at all, in the left half."
quoting from http://cognews.com/1139328519:
The paper itself: "Whorf Hypothesis is Supported in the Right Visual Field but not the Left," by Aubrey Gilbert, Terry Regier, Paul Kay, and Richard Ivry:
http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/~kay/LeftBrainWhorf.pdf
**********************************************************
all this assuming there are no methodological errors in this study...
via![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
dmierkin
quoting from http://cognews.com/1139328519:
The paper suggests that language affects perception in the right half of the visual field, but much less, if at all, in the left half.
...
Many of the distinctions made in English do not appear in other languages, and vice versa. For instance, English uses two different words for the colors blue and green, while many other languages – such as Tarahumara, an indigenous language of Mexico – instead use a single color term that covers shades of both blue and green. An earlier study by Paul Kay and colleagues had shown that speakers of English and Tarahumara perceive colors differently: English speakers found blues and greens to be more distinct from each other than speakers of Tarahumara did, as if the English "green" / "blue" linguistic distinction sharpened the perceptual difference between the colors themselves. The present study essentially repeated the English part of that earlier test, but also made sure that colors were presented to either the right or the left half of the visual field – something the earlier study hadn't done – so as to test whether language influences the right half of our visual world more than the left half, as predicted by brain organization.
In each experimental trial of the present study, participants saw a ring of colored squares. All the squares were of exactly the same color, except for an "odd-man-out" of a different color. The odd-man-out appeared in either the right or the left half of the circle, and participants were asked to indicate which side of the circle the odd-man-out was on, by making a keyboard response. Critically, the color of this odd-man-out had either the same name as the other squares (e.g. a shade of "green", while the others were all a different shade of "green"), or a different name (e.g. a shade of "blue", while the others were all a shade of "green"). The researchers found that participants responded more quickly when the color of the odd-man-out had a different name than the color of the other squares – as if the linguistic difference had heightened the perceptual difference – but this only occurred if the odd-man-out was in the right half of the visual field, and not when it was in the left half. This was the predicted pattern.
The paper itself: "Whorf Hypothesis is Supported in the Right Visual Field but not the Left," by Aubrey Gilbert, Terry Regier, Paul Kay, and Richard Ivry:
http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/~kay/LeftBrainWhorf.pdf
**********************************************************
all this assuming there are no methodological errors in this study...
via
dmierkin
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 05:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 06:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 01:30 pm (UTC)Very interesting. I know the second author it turns out :)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 02:34 pm (UTC)Language determines the way we think. Most people's first concious childhood memories coincide with the time they learned to talk. If we have no way of describing something, in a way it doesn't exist.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 02:49 pm (UTC)The asymmetry is not between eyes, but between parts of visual fields of each eye, if I understand correctly...
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 03:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 03:21 pm (UTC)I doubt this: "strong"/"weak" eye depends on the optical properties of an eye (my right eye was weak before I started to wear eyeglasses, and I am right-handed; this asymmetry in my case might have been caused by the preferential use of the right eye during reading [back to language]).
> left/right-handedness
What about the speech hemisphere? It's still the left hemisphere of the brain, i.e. right side of the body and the world (neural cross-connection), regardless of left/right-handedness, is not it?
But it would be interesting to control for left/right-handedness and for weak eyes, to check for possible alternative explanations...
**********************************
The straightforward explanation, that this is caused by "hidden synaesthesia" between vision and speech, and that this happens mostly in the left hemisphere, where the speech is processed, and thus affects only the right field of view, which is also processed in the left hemisphere of the brain, still seems the most plausible to me...
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 03:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 03:30 pm (UTC)So I added the reference to the original paper and the disclaimer instead, for the time being ;-)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 03:34 pm (UTC)OK, maybe it's time to get some work done... Talk to you later. Happy Valentine's! ;-)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 03:42 pm (UTC)I think we should develop a disclaimer calculus (Turing-complete, of course), where everything will be built from the disclaimers ;-) A great student project...
> Talk to you later. Happy Valentine's! ;-)
Да, да... Именно...
И этим передавайте поздравления... которые жуткие ;-)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 03:51 pm (UTC)Ладно, всем передам :-)))
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 04:00 pm (UTC);-) это, все таки, не абстрактный праздник ;-) детишки пусть сами находят, кого им с этим поздравлять ;-)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 04:20 pm (UTC)это, все таки, не абстрактный праздник - да уже практически абстрактный. Младший весь вечер валентинки писал всем одноклассникам :-))
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 04:53 pm (UTC)у?! :-) :-) :-)
> писал всем одноклассникам :-)
какой ужас! :-) куда смотрят защитники моральных устоев?! :-)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 04:59 pm (UTC)какой ужас! :-) куда смотрят защитники моральных устоев?! - Считают взятки, полученные от производителей открыток.
Слуш, редиск, я работать сегодня буду, или где?
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 04:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 05:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 05:36 pm (UTC)пошли "трудиться" ;-)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 10:05 pm (UTC)http://swiss.csail.mit.edu/classes/symbolic/spring06/
"Adventures in Advanced Symbolic Programming", 6.891
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 02:49 pm (UTC)That's what they say :) But solid evidence for that is not easy to come b, it seems.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 02:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 05:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 07:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 07:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 03:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 03:57 pm (UTC)то есть, как контрпример...