Interface Theory vs Gibson: An Ontological Defense of the Ecological Approach

References

• Adams, F., & Aizawa, K. (2008). The Bounds of Cognition. John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Agyei, S. B., van der Weel, F. R., & van der Meer, A. L. (2016b). Longitudinal study of preterm and full-term infants: High-density EEG analyses of cortical activity in response to visual motion. Neuropsychologia, 84, 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.02.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agyei, S. B., Van der Weel, F. R., & Van der Meer, A. L. (2016a). Development of visual motion perception for prospective control: Brain and behavioral studies in infants. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 100. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00100
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baggs, E., & Chemero, A. (2019). The third sense of environment. In J. B. Wagman & J. J. C. Blau (Eds.), Perception as Information Detection: Reflections on Gibson’s Ecological Approach to Visual Perception (pp. 5–20). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, L. (2011). Beyond the brain: How body and environment shape animal and human minds. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bickhard, M. H. (2009). The interactivist model. Synthese, 166(3), 547–591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9375-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bingham, G. P. (1988). Task specific devices and the perceptual bottleneck. Human Movement Science, 7(2–4), 5–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-9457(88)90013-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bingham, G. P. (1995). Dynamics and the problem of visual event recognition. In R. Port & T. van Gelder (Eds.), Mind as Motion: Dynamics, Behavior and Cognition (pp. 403–448). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chemero, A. (2003). An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 15(2), 181–195. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326969ECO1502_5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chemero, A. (2009). Radical Embodied Cognitive Science. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, A., & Toribio, J. (1994). Doing without representing? Synthese, 101(3), 401–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01063896
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costall, A., & Morris, P. (2015). The “textbook Gibson”: The assimilation of dissidence. History of Psychology, 18(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038398
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Wit, M. M., van der Kamp, J., & Withagen, R. (2015). Visual illusions and direct perception: Elaborating on Gibson’s insights. New Ideas in Psychology, 36, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2014.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fodor, J. A. (1980). Methodological solipsism considered as a research strategy in cognitive psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00001771
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fodor, J. A., & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1981). How direct is visual perception?: Some reflections on Gibson’s “ecological approach”. Cognition, 9(2), 139–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(81)90009-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Golonka, S. (2015). Laws and conventions in language-related behaviors. Ecological Psychology, 27(3), 236–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2015.1068654
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golonka, S., & Wilson, A. D. (2012). Gibson’s ecological approach-a model for the benefits of a theory driven psychology. Avant, 3(2). http://avant.edu.pl/wp-content/uploads/SGAW-Gibson-s-ecological-approach.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Golonka, S., & Wilson, A. D. (2019a). Ecological representations. Ecological Psychology, 31(3), 235–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2019.1615224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D. Nonlinear Phenomena, 42(1), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(90)90087-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffman, D. (2008). Sensory experiences as cryptic symbols of a multi-modal user interface. (Computer, Felsen, Gehirne und Sterne: Raetselhafte Zeichen einer multimodalen Benutzerschnittstelle). In M. Bauer, F. Liptay, & S. Marschall (Eds.), Kunst und Kognition (pp. 261–279). Wilhelm Fink.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, D. (2009). The interface theory of perception: Natural selection drives true perception to swift extinction. In S. Dickinson, M. Tarr, A. Leonardis, & B. Schiele (Eds.), Object categorization: Computer and human vision perspectives (pp. 148–165). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, D. (2011). The construction of visual reality. In J. D. Blom & I. Sommer (Eds.), Hallucination: Research and Practice (pp. 7–15). Springer Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, D., & Singh, M. (2012). Computational evolutionary perception. Perception, 41(9), 1073–1091. https://doi.org/10.1068/p7275
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffman, D. D., Singh, M., & Prakash, C. (2015). The interface theory of perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(6), 1480–1506. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0890-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mace, W. (1977). James Gibson’s strategy for perceiving: Ask not what’s inside your head, but what your head’s inside of. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing. Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Mark, J., Marion, B., & Hoffman, D. (2010). Natural selection and veridical perception. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 266(4), 504–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.07.020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markkula, G., Benderius, O., & Wahde, M. (2014). Comparing and validating models of driver steering behaviour in collision avoidance and vehicle stabilisation. Vehicle System Dynamics, 52(12), 1658–1680. https://doi.org/10.1080/00423114.2014.954589
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michaels, C. F., & Carello, C. (1981). Direct perception. Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Mon-Williams, M., & Bingham, G. P. (2008). Ontological issues in distance perception: Cue use under full cue conditions cannot be inferred from use under controlled conditions. Perception & Psychophysics, 70(3), 551–561. https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.3.551
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mumford, S. (2003). Dispositions. Oxford University Press on Demand.
   Google Scholar
• Newell, A. (1980). Physical symbol systems. Cognitive Science, 4(2), 135–183. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0402_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, H. (1980). Models and reality. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 45(3), 464–482. https://doi.org/10.2307/2273415
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, H. (1994). Sense, nonsense, and the senses: An inquiry into the powers of the human mind. The Journal of Philosophy, 91(9), 445–517. https://doi.org/10.2307/2940978
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pylyshyn, Z. (1989). Computation in cognitive science. In M. I. Posner (Ed.), Foundations of Cognitive Science. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ramsey, W. M. (2007). Representation reconsidered. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rietveld, E., & Kiverstein, J. (2014). A rich landscape of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 26(4), 325–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2014.958035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runeson, S. (1988). The distorted room illusion, equivalent configurations, and the specificity of static optic arrays. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 14(2), 295–304. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.14.2.295
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runeson, S., & Frykholm, G. (1983). Kinematic specification of dynamics as an informational basis for person-and-action perception: Expectation, gender recognition, and deceptive intention. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 112(4), 585. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.112.4.585
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scarantino, A. (2003). Affordances explained. Philosophy of Science, 70(5), 949–961. https://doi.org/10.1086/377380
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Searle, J. (1980). Minds, Brains, and Programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(3), 417–424. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00005756
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw, R., McIntyre, M., & Mace, W. (1974). The role of symmetry in event perception. In R. B. MacLeod & H. L. Pick (Eds.), Perception: Essays in Honor of James J. Gibson. Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shaw, R., Turvey, M., & Mace, W. (1982). Ecology psychology: The consequence of a commitment to realism. In W. Weimer & D. Palermo (Eds.), Cognition and the Symbolic Processes II. Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Stoffregen, T. A. (2003). Affordances as properties of the animal-environment system. Ecological Psychology, 15(2), 115–134. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326969ECO1502_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turvey, M. (1977). Preliminaries to a theory of action with reference to vision. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing. Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Turvey, M., & Shaw, R. (1979). The primacy of perceiving: An ecological reformulation of perception for understanding memory. In L. G. Nillson (Ed.), Perspectives on Memory Research. Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Turvey, M. T. (1992). Affordances and prospective control: An outline of the ontology. Ecological Psychology, 4(3), 173–187. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326969eco0403_3
   Google Scholar
• Turvey, M. T. (2019). Lectures on Perception: An Ecological Perspective. NY; Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Turvey, M. T., Shaw, R. E., Reed, E. S., & Mace, W. M. (1981). Ecological laws of perceiving and acting: In reply to Fodor and Pylyshyn (1981). Cognition, 9(3), 237–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(81)90002-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Der Meer, A. L., Svantesson, M., & Van Der Weel, F. R. (2012). Longitudinal study of looming in infants with high-density EEG. Developmental Neuroscience, 34(6), 488–501. https://doi.org/10.1159/000345154
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Uexküll, J. (1957). A stroll through the worlds of animals and men. In C. H. Schiller & K. S. Lashley (Eds.), Instinctive Behaviour: The Development of a Modern Concept (pp. 5–82). International Universities Press, Madison, Conn. (Original work published in 1934.).
   Google Scholar
• Warren, W. H. (2006). The dynamics of perception and action. Psychological Review, 113(2), 358. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.113.2.358
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, A. D. (2021). You cannot perceive a relational affordance. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/5qb92.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, A. D., & Bingham, G. P. (2001). Dynamics, not kinematics, is an adequate basis for perception – Commentary on Shepard (2001). Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(4), 709–710. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X01700088
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, A. D., Weightman, A., Bingham, G. P., & Zhu, Q. (2016a). Using task dynamics to quantify the affordances of throwing for long distance and accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 42(7), 965–981.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, A. D., Zhu, Q., Barham, L., Stanistreet, I., & Bingham, G. P. (2016b). A dynamical analysis of the suitability of prehistoric spheroids from the Cave of Hearths as thrown projectiles. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 30614. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep30614
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson, A. D., Zhu, Q., & Bingham, G. P. (2018). Affordances and the ecological approach to throwing for long distances and accuracy. In Handbook of Embodied Cognition and Sport Psychology Ed. Massimiliano Cappuccio), MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zaal, F. T., & Bootsma, R. J. (2011). Virtual reality as a tool for the study of perception-action: The case of running to catch fly balls. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 20(1), 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres_a_00037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, Q., & Bingham, G. P. (2010). Learning To Perceive the Affordance for Long-Distance Throwing: Smart Mechanism or Function Learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 36(4), 862–875. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018738
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, Q., & Bingham, G. P. (2011). Human readiness to throw: The size-weight illusion is not an illusion when picking the best objects to throw. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32(4), 288–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, Q., & Bingham, G. P. (2014). Seeing where the stone is thrown by observing a point-light thrower: Perceiving the effect of action is enabled by information, not motor experience. Ecological Psychology, 26(4), 229–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2014.957969
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, Q., Shockley, K., Riley, M. A., Tolston, M. T., & Bingham, G. P. (2013). Felt heaviness is used to perceive the affordance for throwing but rotational inertia does not affect either. Experimental Brain Research, 224(2), 221–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-012-3301-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar