Thanks Rick.
···
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 1:54 AM, Warren Mansell wmansell@gmail.com wrote:
WM: Hi Rick, you seem to be trying to answer my question by saying what you know I already know rather than answering my question in terms of how I asked it. I know that behaviour is the control of input and we even did a study to
gether demonstrating what you have simulated here! That is why I was wondering whether the logic could go even further - such that an output signal could lead to a behaviour that is perceived as sequential even though the output signal used to command it is not.
RM: I’m sorry. I didn’t understand your question correctly. When you asked: “does that mean one can produce a (perceived) sequence of one’s own outputs without sending down a signal internally within the hierarchy that is sequential?” I took “outputs” to refer to the proximal result of neural signals, specifically muscle tensions. But now you ask whether “an output signal could lead to a behaviour that is perceived as sequential even though the output signal used to command it is not”. And to this the answer is clearly “yes” since this is exactly what is happening in the demo. When you control a sequence of sizes your press of th
e space bar is the single output that keeps the sequence in its reference state. The bar press is the only think I would call an output; the sequence that is display is a consequence of this output but it is really the controlled variable. The control “behaviour” in this task includes both the output (bar press) and controlled variable (sequence). So here we have a situation where on output signal – the neural signal that produces the bar press output – leads to a behaviour – the sequence that is the controlled variable – that is clearly a sequence that is produced by an output signal that is not (it just produces a press).
Best
Rick
I think this could happen when a person uses a robotic device as a feedback function be
cause it can generate a desired sequence at one push of a button. I would also think this can occur at the higher levels of the hierarchy - they don’t need to have any sequencing in their output signal to command a sequence to be generated and perceived at higher levels. This often happens when I talk - I don’t try to control the sequence of my utterances but they are sequenced.
Does that make sense? Please don’t provide the same answer again!
Cheers Rick,
Warren
–
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Richard Marken rsmarken@gmail.com wrote:
[From Rick Marken (2015.09.20.110
0)]
–
Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Clinical Psychology
School of Psychological Sciences
2nd Floor Zochonis Building
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk
Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589
Website: http://www.psych-sci.manches
ter.ac.uk/staff/131406
Advanced notice of a new transdiagnostic therapy manual, authored by Carey, Mansell & Tai - Principles-Based Counselling and Psychotherapy: A Method of Levels Approach
Available Now
Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory
On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Warren Mansell wmansell@gmail.com wrote:
WM: Hi Rick, does that mean one can produce a (perceived) sequence of one’s own outputs without sending down a signal internally within the hierarchy that is sequential? I think this is the case too…
RM: No, in order to produce a sequence of one’s own outputs, such as a sequence of finger presses (on piano keys, perhaps) the nervous system would have to be sending the correct sequence of efferent outputs to the muscles that move the fingers. But PCT says that this sequence of outputs is organized aro
und producing the intended sequence perception. So what is being controlled is not the output sequence but the perceptual consequences of these outputs – the sequence of feelings of pressure at the fingertips, for example, when you play a sequences of notes on the piano.
RM: My little demo shows that the limitation in one’s ability to produce a behavior like a sequence of notes on the piano is on the input side, not the output side. In my demo the sequence can be controlled (kept in a reference state) by simply tapping on the space bar, a very simple motor act. In the demo it’s not necessary to actually produce the sequence by producing the outputs that generate the sequence. Nevertheless, you can’t produce the desired sequence using that simple motor output when you are not able to perceive the sequence.
RM: Evidence that the limitation on producing intended results is an input rather than an outpu
t limitation also comes from the fact that we are able to produce outputs, like a two finger trill on the piano much more quickly than we can produce a non-trill two finger sequence. If 1 and 2 are the two fingers, then you can produce a trill, like 1212121212, at a much high rate (I think 10 keys/sec for a skilled pianist) than you can produce a more complex sequence with the same number of 1s and 2s, like 1221221112, (maybe 4 keys/sec on a good day). The reason is that the perception you control when playing a trill – a transition perception – is at a lower level then the one you control when playing a more complex sequence – a sequence perception.
RM: I think the main thing my little demo illustrates is an experimental way to reveal the hierarchical relationship between different types of controlled variables. I think it also shows what PCT means by control of higher level perceptions, like the perception of a sequence. Behavioral sequence
s in particular are often difficult to see as anything other than generated outputs: a pianist seems to generate a sequence of key press outputs, a speaker seems to generate a sequence of word outputs, etc. In this demo you are clearly producing an intended sequence of shapes without producing a sequence of outputs. So you are clearly controlling a sequence perception.
RM: I think it’s also interesting to notice that at the “Medium” speed you can perceive the elements of the sequence – the different size shapes – and you can tell that the sizes of the shapes are being presented in a sequence – that is, you can see that small sometimes follows large and small sometimes follows medium and so on; you just can’t perceive the sequence – whether it’s small, medium, large or small, large, medium – at this speed. This is another nice piece of evidence that perceptions are constructed hierarchically. If I have time I will put up a little demo
that allows you to control a program perception, and that again allows you to do it by just pressing the space bar. In order for you to be able to control the program the rate of presentation of the elements of the program will have to be even slower than the rate of presentation of the elements of the sequence, showing that a program perception is constructed at an even higher level that a sequence perception.
Best
Rick
Warren
On 19 Sep 2015, at 22:31, Richard Marken rsmarken@gmail.com wrote:
[From Rick Marken (2015.09.19.1430)]
RM: I finally completed the Javascript version of my Hierarchical Control of Perception Demo (I am trying to convert all my demos from Java to Javascript since Java doesn’t run on tablets and doesn’t seem to on my computer browsers anymore either) . It’s at:
http://www.mindreadings.com/ControlDemo/Hierarchy.html
RM: I’d appreciate any comments and/or suggestions regarding the experiment itself and the write up.
RM: Beside the fact that I think it’s a nice way to illustrate a hierarchical relation ship b
etween perceptions I think it’s also a nice way to get a feel for what is meant by controlling different aspects of the environment (since you can control different aspects of the same physical display in the demo) as well as a feel for what it means to control a more complex perception, in this case the perception of a sequence. And it shows how you can control a sequence perception without producing a sequence of outputs. Controlling a sequence involved producing an intended sequence of perceptions,not outputs.
RM: Happy controlling.
Best
Rick
–
Richard S. Marken
www.mindreadings.com
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble
–
Richard S. Marken
www.mindreadings.com
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble
Richard S. Marken
www.mindreadings.com
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble