On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 08:38:56 -0700, Michael Britt wrote:
>There has been a lot of talk on the internet lately about perceptual learning. 
> 

That can be either a good thing or a bad thing.

>I believe that most of it was spurred by an article on the topic that appeared 
>in the NYT.  

I have a feeling you're referring this article by Benedict Carey; see:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/07/health/07learn.html?pagewanted=all 

Note:  a red flag in the article is represented by the following statement:
|For years school curriculums have emphasized top-down instruction, 
|especially for topics like math and science. Learn the rules first — the 
|theorems, the order of operations, Newton’s laws — then make a run 
|at the problem list at the end of the chapter. Yet recent research has 
|found that true experts have something at least as valuable as a mastery 
|of the rules: gut instinct, an instantaneous grasp of the type of problem 
|they’re up against. 

The above statement, IMHO, confuses a number of issues.  Though
I think that Gerd Gigerenzer has done a lot of good work, I am not
convinced by his "fast and frugal heuristics" which he call "gut instinct".
I assume that use of "gut instinct" above is referring to Gigerenzer's
concept and not some bizarre notion that the way your stomach
feels is guide to decision-making and problem solving.  I would also
argue that "gut instinct" is very different from coming up with a
problem representation that leads to a quick solution (e.g.,
it is reported that Sir Ronald Fisher translated statistical problems
into geometrical representations and worked out the problem in
geometric terms and then re-mapped the process and solution
back to a algebraic form).  I also think that they may be many
different definitions of what perceptual learning means though
there may be a current viewpoint that "appears" to provide an
adequate explanation.

>I have to admit that I don't know much about this topic, so two 
>questions for those of you more familiar with it than I:
>
>1) What's the best source (book, published article) for learning 
>how perceptual learning works?

Wikipedia has an entry on the topic (yadda-yadda); see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptual_learning
You might want to check out some of the references there but I
think the coverage of the topic is quite minimal (e.g., as a graduate
student perceptual learning was a topic associated with Eleanor
Gibson and appeared to be a topic in cognitive development;
Eleanor's work is mentioned in only one sentence and no 
reference is given).

I think that you do better with a PsycInfo search and perhaps
looking the literature decade by decade but look for review
articles.  Poggio and Manfred and others appear to have
re-invigorated the topic in the past decade (see their MIT
press book "Perceptual Learning") but, since I don't keep
up this area, I don't know if this an extension of previous
research and theories or a completely new "paradigm".

>2) Are there applications for the idea in the teaching of statistics 
>for psychology majors?  I've been trying to apply what little I 
>know about perceptual learning to how I might use it in a stat class, 
>but it's just not clear to me yet.  Wondering if any of you have 
>used it or are thinking about this as well.

I don't know about this.  David Krantz at Columbia has been
looking at the question of how to teach statistics and how students
understand the topics presented in statistics class.  I don't if
he believes in perceptual learning or not but you might check out
his work and his perspective.

-Mike Palij
New York University
[email protected]



---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=11039
or send a blank email to 
leave-11039-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Reply via email to