Actual Responses from Beav's PSYC 463 Exams, Exam 1 Retake
If you didn't catch the first in this series of posts, basically my PSYC 463 professor is really cool, and finds it entertaining when I joke around some while answering my test questions. She made the mistake of admitting that she thinks I'm funny, so that loosed a demon right there. The following are some actual responses from when I retook Exam 1.
Q: What is detection? Compare and contrast absolute threshold and difference threshold. Why are thresholds important?
Me: First I'd just like to say that those multiple choice questions were BRUTAL. Easily at least twice as hard as the original exam. You have an amazing ability to select the questions that I told myself, "She won't ask that on the exam."
Detection is basically the realization that a stimulus is present. In an unrelated story, a really attractive girl just sat down next to me. This could be a distraction, but I'll attempt to soldier on.
Absolute Threshold: The minimum amount of enery necessary for a subject to reliably detect the presence of a stimulus.
Difference Threshold: The smallest difference between two intensities of stimuli that can be reliably detected by a subject.
Thresholds are important because they tell us a great deal about the amounts of energy that are necessary for us to be able to perceive the world around us. The range of applications is so huge that I dare not get into it, lest I fail to do it justice and also run out of time. For me personally, thresholds make me aware that there is a whole gamut (bonus word points) of energy in the world, and I'm only aware of the middle-most percentage of said gamut, generally speaking. Threshholds are also important because without them, we'd have noplace to put our doormats and indicate in woven writing to visitors that they are "welcome" in our homes. (Minus 3 terrible joke points)
Her: Need some cheese with that whine? ;-) Remember thresholds help define "normal" and so help us understand perceptual defecits
Q: Define a neural circuit and briefly describe the two basic types. Compare rods vs. cones in terms of neural circuitry, and describe the resulting differences in perception. Briefly discuss whether the nature of human neural circuits argues for a passive fidelity or an active organizational perceptual system.
Me: (First part of response was not funny, just answering the question, I'll pick up where I start being a jackass) This is why when that hot girl sat down next to me and I got her image right on my fovea-o'-cones (scientific name), I could see her in sharp detail. Tall, blonde, thin, red shirt, jeans, etc. I would like to point out at this time that I am not creepy or a stalker, contrary to how it may sound from my example. When I got back to focusing on my exam, she was now in my visual periphery, so while I knew she was still there, more rods than cones were picking up her image, so I just kinda had a general idea that she was there and about how big she was and whether she was moving. (rest of answer is also not funny)
Her: Thanks for making me laugh out loud....you must type well or your exams would take forever, but they are amusing. AND you did a good job answering all parts of the question
Q: What is a feature detector? Describe the kinds of ?specialized? visual feature detectors that appear to exist in bees, frogs and primates. How important are specialized complex feature detectors for visual perception? Are these feature detectors inborn or created through experience (be careful and complete!)? Why might animals have these detectors for some kinds of objects/features, but not for others?
Me: (Most of response is technical and boring) Basically let's explain it this way: think of an animal with a decent visual system, then think of a thing in its environment that it would be really important for that animal to recognize. Got one? There's a feature detector for that. (Your example was a horse, and your environmental thing was hay. If I'm wrong about this...pretend like I wasn't. If I'm right, +10 psychic points.) I could go on like this, but I think you get the idea.
Tangent: The girl who just sat down now is wearing my favorite kind of perfume. How am I supposed to focus with that going on? Honestly...
These specified cells are very important to visual perception, because without them, how would we have an specific vision? The world would be a big, unintelligible blur. If I only had one kind of cortical cell for my vision, I'd run into stuff like the dickens. Okay...maybe that's not a great example, but I really wanted to say "like the dickens". Feature detectors allow us to (duh) detect the features of the world around us, and adjust accordingly.
Now why might animals have feature detectors for some objects but not others? Well, are you a creationist or a Darwinist? Being a Darwinist myself, I'll say that it's probably a combination of chance and adaptivity that was evolved over many many years. They probably had detectors for a ton of stuff once upon a time, but the animals with an abundance of the detectors without practical application probably were less successful in what Dr. Leger likes to call "the reproductive arena". The ones with lots of detectors that helped them survive (such as bees having detectors for flowers, me having detectors for Chipotle) were more successful reproductively, and gradually the species evolved to consist of individuals with abundant, adaptive feature detectors. I know that's oversimplifying it, but it would take many pages to properly explain it in an evolutionary context.
If you're a creationist, the answer is that God wanted it that way, and don't you question Him or you'll burn.
Her: --You invented the horse and hay thing.... --You have skirted around the plasticity issue...almost got there but no-o-o-t quite...remember we landed on the idea that there is certainly the PLASTICITY to develop feature detectors for environmental stimuli that are important --Assuming your Darwin poisition for the moment, would an individual start out with "tons" of feature detectors and have many wither and die? Or would individuals start out with the plasticity to develop feature detectors for those things that enhanced their survival....and so on as you described? (Although I'm still trying to figure out how a feature detector for Chipotle will enhance your reproductive success?????) --Do you really believe that creationism and Darwinism MUST be mutually exclusive? (and no I'm still not telling)....
Q: Briefly compare and contrast the trichromatic and opponent process theories of color perception. Are these theories specificity theories or across-fiber pattern (distributed coding) theories? Why? What was the result of the "clash" of these two opposing theories?
Me: Whoooooooo, briefly huh? I'll see what I can do.
My latest distraction: I'm hungry, and the proctors are eating Papa John's pizza in their little proctor office. Now that's just not cool.
(insert long, boring answer with no jokes)
The debate created a great sexual tension between the theories, but the tension was resolved two were mated after it was discovered that both were correct, and were simply occurring in different parts of the visual sytem.
Q: You're sitting in the basement intently reading a chapter in your perception text for the second time (is this a dream?), when you suddenly notice, out of the corner of your eye, that something is scampering across the floor. You immediately lift your nose out of your book, look around and discover what looks like a mouse about 10 feet away from you. You quietly move a little closer and determine that the mouse is actually your roommate's pet mouse Rover (so named for his propensity for roving aimlessly about).
27(d) Which layers of the LGN will receive information about the "scampering" motion? (Be complete and specific and explain your answer.)
Me: Oh ballacks. To be consistent with my earier answer and avoid cognitive dissonance, I'm going to say layers one and two because they detect motion, but I could be entirely incorrect. The word for those layers completely escapes me. I have a "pu..." in my mind, but all I can come up with are purposive, purfunctory and purgatory, none of which is correct.
Q: 28(a) What perceptual process begins immediately when the lights go out?
Me: Dark adaptation, as well as the audition of my swearing aloud.
28(b) With your reading light out, how long will it take before your ability to see the words in your book will be as good as it's going to get? Explain your answer.
Me: Well that depends...am I to assume that there is still some light available? If there is no light, then I can sit there until the cows come home, I'm not gonna see anything. If there is a little bit of light, then my ability to see the words in my book will be at its best after about 30 minutes, because this will be the time when I've become fully dark-adapted, and am relying mostly on my rods to take in as much light through their little convergent networks as they can. I'll notice a quick increase for 4-6 minutes while my cones adapt, but it won't be great, and after that they're maxed out. It's gonna be a good 30 before those rods are rockin'.
28(c) After about 10 minutes you notice a faint light coming through the crack in a closet door. (Don't ask me why you're still sitting here in the dark....the stories don't get that detailed!) FIRST, why didn't you notice the light before? SECOND, can you expect your perception of the intensity of the light to change over time? Carefully explain your answers.
Well, I didn't notice that light before because there was a bunch of light already in the room. That faint light was too dim to be detected amidst all the existing light. I can expect it to seem brighter (a.k.a. more intense) over time because my vision will adjust to the dark, and I will be better able to perceive the dim light.
More importantly, where did that mouse go? Now it's all dark and he could be anywhere. My roommate will be pissed if I step on his mouse.
Q: What is detection? Compare and contrast absolute threshold and difference threshold. Why are thresholds important?
Me: First I'd just like to say that those multiple choice questions were BRUTAL. Easily at least twice as hard as the original exam. You have an amazing ability to select the questions that I told myself, "She won't ask that on the exam."
Detection is basically the realization that a stimulus is present. In an unrelated story, a really attractive girl just sat down next to me. This could be a distraction, but I'll attempt to soldier on.
Absolute Threshold: The minimum amount of enery necessary for a subject to reliably detect the presence of a stimulus.
Difference Threshold: The smallest difference between two intensities of stimuli that can be reliably detected by a subject.
Thresholds are important because they tell us a great deal about the amounts of energy that are necessary for us to be able to perceive the world around us. The range of applications is so huge that I dare not get into it, lest I fail to do it justice and also run out of time. For me personally, thresholds make me aware that there is a whole gamut (bonus word points) of energy in the world, and I'm only aware of the middle-most percentage of said gamut, generally speaking. Threshholds are also important because without them, we'd have noplace to put our doormats and indicate in woven writing to visitors that they are "welcome" in our homes. (Minus 3 terrible joke points)
Her: Need some cheese with that whine? ;-) Remember thresholds help define "normal" and so help us understand perceptual defecits
Q: Define a neural circuit and briefly describe the two basic types. Compare rods vs. cones in terms of neural circuitry, and describe the resulting differences in perception. Briefly discuss whether the nature of human neural circuits argues for a passive fidelity or an active organizational perceptual system.
Me: (First part of response was not funny, just answering the question, I'll pick up where I start being a jackass) This is why when that hot girl sat down next to me and I got her image right on my fovea-o'-cones (scientific name), I could see her in sharp detail. Tall, blonde, thin, red shirt, jeans, etc. I would like to point out at this time that I am not creepy or a stalker, contrary to how it may sound from my example. When I got back to focusing on my exam, she was now in my visual periphery, so while I knew she was still there, more rods than cones were picking up her image, so I just kinda had a general idea that she was there and about how big she was and whether she was moving. (rest of answer is also not funny)
Her: Thanks for making me laugh out loud....you must type well or your exams would take forever, but they are amusing. AND you did a good job answering all parts of the question
Q: What is a feature detector? Describe the kinds of ?specialized? visual feature detectors that appear to exist in bees, frogs and primates. How important are specialized complex feature detectors for visual perception? Are these feature detectors inborn or created through experience (be careful and complete!)? Why might animals have these detectors for some kinds of objects/features, but not for others?
Me: (Most of response is technical and boring) Basically let's explain it this way: think of an animal with a decent visual system, then think of a thing in its environment that it would be really important for that animal to recognize. Got one? There's a feature detector for that. (Your example was a horse, and your environmental thing was hay. If I'm wrong about this...pretend like I wasn't. If I'm right, +10 psychic points.) I could go on like this, but I think you get the idea.
Tangent: The girl who just sat down now is wearing my favorite kind of perfume. How am I supposed to focus with that going on? Honestly...
These specified cells are very important to visual perception, because without them, how would we have an specific vision? The world would be a big, unintelligible blur. If I only had one kind of cortical cell for my vision, I'd run into stuff like the dickens. Okay...maybe that's not a great example, but I really wanted to say "like the dickens". Feature detectors allow us to (duh) detect the features of the world around us, and adjust accordingly.
Now why might animals have feature detectors for some objects but not others? Well, are you a creationist or a Darwinist? Being a Darwinist myself, I'll say that it's probably a combination of chance and adaptivity that was evolved over many many years. They probably had detectors for a ton of stuff once upon a time, but the animals with an abundance of the detectors without practical application probably were less successful in what Dr. Leger likes to call "the reproductive arena". The ones with lots of detectors that helped them survive (such as bees having detectors for flowers, me having detectors for Chipotle) were more successful reproductively, and gradually the species evolved to consist of individuals with abundant, adaptive feature detectors. I know that's oversimplifying it, but it would take many pages to properly explain it in an evolutionary context.
If you're a creationist, the answer is that God wanted it that way, and don't you question Him or you'll burn.
Her: --You invented the horse and hay thing.... --You have skirted around the plasticity issue...almost got there but no-o-o-t quite...remember we landed on the idea that there is certainly the PLASTICITY to develop feature detectors for environmental stimuli that are important --Assuming your Darwin poisition for the moment, would an individual start out with "tons" of feature detectors and have many wither and die? Or would individuals start out with the plasticity to develop feature detectors for those things that enhanced their survival....and so on as you described? (Although I'm still trying to figure out how a feature detector for Chipotle will enhance your reproductive success?????) --Do you really believe that creationism and Darwinism MUST be mutually exclusive? (and no I'm still not telling)....
Q: Briefly compare and contrast the trichromatic and opponent process theories of color perception. Are these theories specificity theories or across-fiber pattern (distributed coding) theories? Why? What was the result of the "clash" of these two opposing theories?
Me: Whoooooooo, briefly huh? I'll see what I can do.
My latest distraction: I'm hungry, and the proctors are eating Papa John's pizza in their little proctor office. Now that's just not cool.
(insert long, boring answer with no jokes)
The debate created a great sexual tension between the theories, but the tension was resolved two were mated after it was discovered that both were correct, and were simply occurring in different parts of the visual sytem.
Q: You're sitting in the basement intently reading a chapter in your perception text for the second time (is this a dream?), when you suddenly notice, out of the corner of your eye, that something is scampering across the floor. You immediately lift your nose out of your book, look around and discover what looks like a mouse about 10 feet away from you. You quietly move a little closer and determine that the mouse is actually your roommate's pet mouse Rover (so named for his propensity for roving aimlessly about).
27(d) Which layers of the LGN will receive information about the "scampering" motion? (Be complete and specific and explain your answer.)
Me: Oh ballacks. To be consistent with my earier answer and avoid cognitive dissonance, I'm going to say layers one and two because they detect motion, but I could be entirely incorrect. The word for those layers completely escapes me. I have a "pu..." in my mind, but all I can come up with are purposive, purfunctory and purgatory, none of which is correct.
Q: 28(a) What perceptual process begins immediately when the lights go out?
Me: Dark adaptation, as well as the audition of my swearing aloud.
28(b) With your reading light out, how long will it take before your ability to see the words in your book will be as good as it's going to get? Explain your answer.
Me: Well that depends...am I to assume that there is still some light available? If there is no light, then I can sit there until the cows come home, I'm not gonna see anything. If there is a little bit of light, then my ability to see the words in my book will be at its best after about 30 minutes, because this will be the time when I've become fully dark-adapted, and am relying mostly on my rods to take in as much light through their little convergent networks as they can. I'll notice a quick increase for 4-6 minutes while my cones adapt, but it won't be great, and after that they're maxed out. It's gonna be a good 30 before those rods are rockin'.
28(c) After about 10 minutes you notice a faint light coming through the crack in a closet door. (Don't ask me why you're still sitting here in the dark....the stories don't get that detailed!) FIRST, why didn't you notice the light before? SECOND, can you expect your perception of the intensity of the light to change over time? Carefully explain your answers.
Well, I didn't notice that light before because there was a bunch of light already in the room. That faint light was too dim to be detected amidst all the existing light. I can expect it to seem brighter (a.k.a. more intense) over time because my vision will adjust to the dark, and I will be better able to perceive the dim light.
More importantly, where did that mouse go? Now it's all dark and he could be anywhere. My roommate will be pissed if I step on his mouse.
posted by Beav at 3:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home