Subject: Re: Difference between cognition and perception? From: Chuck Larson <clarson(at)NORTHWESTERN.EDU> Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 14:34:11 -0500Dear All, I've been following this discussion with interest because it may relate directly to one of my experimental findings. Background: I study how a person's voice F0 responds to pitch shifted auditory feedback. In most people, when voice pitch feedback is shifted up, the voice F0 goes down; and vice versa for a downward shift in voice pitch feedback. We call these "compensatory responses" However, some people, or take the case of a single person when tested at different times, will produce a change in voice F0 that follows the direction of the change in pitch feedback. We call these "following responses." In some pilot studies I have found that whether a person produces a "following" or compensatory response may depend on how they are focusing their attention. For example, if they are focusing their attention on the feeling in their larynx, it may be a "following" response, and when they focus on the sound of their voice, it may be a compensatory response. In the context of the remarks made by Dan Tollin, our observations appear to relate to reflexive behavior that may be modulated by cognitive variables. I think Dan is correct when he says that reflexes probably don't require cognition. But our observations suggest that a cognitive set, or 'state', may influence reflexive behavior of the audio-vocal system. For me, an interesting question is whether the cognitive state influences either the perception of the voice feedback or the motor response. Chuck Larson >List, > > Some might argue that reflexes are an optimal respose to a given >situation since they are rapid and have obvious benefit. Reflexes would >seem to fit your description of cognition. For example, touching a hot >stove results in a quick movement of the hand away from the stove. >Following your definition, one could interpret this sequence of events >as a simple 'perception' of heat by the thermoreceptors of the skin >which is then followed by a simple 'cognition' of this input which is >comprehended as 'bad' resulting ultimately in the 'decision' to move the >hand away from the stove in an optimal fashion. > >However, I'd wager that most people would not classify reflexes as >something that requires 'cognition.' Additionally, once you define >'cognition' using terms like 'meaning' and 'comprehending' and >'displayed information' then you've got to define what those terms mean. > > >Daniel J Tollin, PhD > > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: John K. Bates [mailto:jkbates(at)COMPUTER.NET] >> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 12:59 PM >> To: AUDITORY(at)LISTS.MCGILL.CA >> Subject: Re: Difference between cognition and perception? >> >> >> Dear List, >> How about considering the following generalized >> definitions of perception and cognition? I think that they >> could apply to all systems, biological or manufactured, that >> use sensors for the purpose of optimizing performance and/or >> preventing failure. >> >> Perception: The process of receiving, separating, and >> presenting for interpretation the information contained in an >> incoming stream of data. >> >> Cognition: The process of interpreting the meanings of >> situations as represented by the displayed information. >> Comprehending these meanings enables an optimum response. >> >> These definitions were derived from my operational analysis >> of auditory perception available at: >> <http://home.computer.net/~jkbates> >> >> Best regards, >> John Bates >> -- ******************************* Chuck Larson Dept. of Communication Sciences and Disorders 2240 Campus Dr. Northwestern University Evanston, IL 60208 Phone: 847-491-2424 Fax: 847-491-4975 email: clarson(at)northwestern.edu