CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,200Visual perception and processing mechanismsPhilosophy and Theoretical ScienceFace Recognition and Perception

Cognition does not affect perception: Evaluating the evidence for “top-down” effects

Open access
Firestone, Chaz, Scholl, Brian J.·2016·Behavioral and Brain Sciences
DOI 10.1017/s0140525x15000965
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

What determines what we see? In contrast to the traditional “modular” understanding of perception, according to which visual processing is encapsulated from higher-level cognition, a tidal wave of recent research alleges that states such as beliefs, desires, emotions, motivations, intentions, and linguistic representations exert direct, top-down influences on what we see. There is a growing consensus that such effects are ubiquitous, and that the distinction between perception and cognition may itself be unsustainable. We argue otherwise: None of these hundreds of studies – either individually or collectively – provides compelling evidence for true top-down effects on perception, or “cognitive penetrability.” In particular, and despite their variety, we suggest that these studies all fall prey to only a handful of pitfalls. And whereas abstract theoretical challenges have failed to resolve this debate in the past, our presentation of these pitfalls is empirically anchored: In each case, we show not only how certain studies could be susceptible to the pitfall (in principle), but also how several alleged top-down effects actually are explained by the pitfall (in practice). Moreover, these pitfalls are perfectly general, with each applying to dozens of other top-down effects. We conclude by extracting the lessons provided by these pitfalls into a checklist that future work could use to convincingly demonstrate top-down effects on visual perception. The discovery of substantive top-down effects of cognition on perception would revolutionize our understanding of how the mind is organized; but without addressing these pitfalls, no such empirical report will license such exciting conclusions.

AI snapshot

Written from a shortened version of the paper’s full text (it is longer than we read).

TL;DR

Firestone and Scholl argue that none of the hundreds of reported "top-down" effects of cognition on visual perception provides compelling evidence for genuine cognitive penetrability, because the studies collectively fall prey to a small set of methodological pitfalls. They present six such pitfalls, each anchored in empirical case studies, and offer a checklist for future work.

Key findings

  • The authors count "more than 175 papers published since 1995" reporting top-down effects on perception, with a median publication year of 2010 for the empirical papers cited in their review of contemporary effects.
  • They identify six pitfalls: (1) an overly confirmatory research strategy (the "El Greco fallacy"), (2) conflating perception with judgment, (3) demand and response bias, (4) low-level stimulus differences, (5) peripheral attentional effects, and (6) memory and recognition.
  • In their own replications, effects survived when they should have canceled out if truly perceptual: subjects still picked a darker grayscale patch to match a room after reflecting on an unethical action (Firestone & Scholl 2014b, Experiment 5), and still reported narrower apertures when responding with an aperture (Experiment 2).
  • The "moral pop-out effect" replicated with trivial categories: fashion-related words (e.g., "robe," "slippers") and transportation-related words (e.g., "car," "passenger") were more accurately identified than unrelated words, suggesting semantic relatedness/memory rather than morality drives the effect.
  • Blurring race-diagnostic information from face stimuli (Firestone & Scholl 2015a) left the lightness difference intact even among observers who judged the faces to be the same race, implicating low-level visual features.

Methods

  • Design: a theoretical review and critique, combining conceptual argument with "empirically anchored" case studies that re-test prominent alleged top-down effects.
  • Data/sample: the published literature on top-down effects (New Look era through recent work), plus the authors' own replication experiments (e.g., Firestone & Scholl 2014b, 2015a, 2015b).
  • Analysis: for each pitfall, the authors show in principle how studies could be susceptible and in practice how specific reported effects are explained by the pitfall, then extract lessons for future research into a six-item checklist.

Limitations

  • The authors state that Pitfall 5 (peripheral attentional effects) "is not on the sort of firm empirical footing enjoyed by the other pitfalls," having fewer case studies.
  • They acknowledge their claim is "ambitious" given hundreds of reported effects, and note that their presentation covers only effects they "had space to discuss, out of a much larger pool."
  • They concede that not all attentional effects need be peripheral, and that attention may interact with perception in "rich and nuanced ways" — a caveat the accompanying commentaries (e.g., Clark, de Haas et al., Lupyan) argue undermines the breadth of the thesis.
  • Evident from the text: the paper is a critique rather than new primary data across the full literature, and several of its deflationary explanations rest on the authors' own replication studies rather than independent replication.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0140525x15000965

Cites

309 of 309 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 225 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Firestone and Scholl replicated the morality/brightness effect with grayscale patches instead of a numerical scale.

    “We replicated this effect with one small change: Instead of a numerical scale, subjects used a scale of actual grayscale patches to rate the room's brightness.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    The vast majority of reported top-down effects on perception involve only confirmatory tests, in which an effect is observed when the theory calls for it.

    “the vast majority of reported top-down effects on perception involve only the first sort of test: a hypothesis is proffered that some higher-level state affects what we see, and then such an effect is observed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    Later experiments determined the true nonperceptual explanation for the rod/aperture effect, involving task demands.

    “In later experiments, we determined the true, nonperceptual, explanation for this effect, involving task demands; see Pitfall 3.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingcitation

    In the follow-up study, subjects still picked a darker patch to match the room after reflecting on an unethical action.

    “the follow-up study succeeded: subjects still picked a darker patch to match the room after reflecting on an unethical action (Firestone & Scholl 2014b, Experiment 5).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Firestone & Scholl 2014b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingreasoning

    Many alleged top-down effects on perception are explicable by routine judgments.

    “Many alleged top-down effects on perception seem explicable by appeal to these sorts of routine judgments.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 95
  • May combine two claims. 81

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    The median publication year for the empirical papers cited in section 3 is 2010.

    “Indeed, the median publication year for the empirical papers cited in section 3 is 2010.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    More than 175 papers published since 1995 report top-down effects on perception.

    “(As of this writing, we count more than 175 papers published since 1995 reporting such effects; for a list, see http://perception.yale.edu/TopDownPapers.)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingown data

    Firestone and Scholl replicated the rod/aperture effect but tested it with two poles forming an independent passable aperture instead of a measuring tape.

    “We successfully replicated this result, but we also tested it with one critical difference: Instead of adjusting a measuring tape to record subjects' width estimates, the experimenter used two poles that themselves formed an independent and potentially passable aperture.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingreasoning

    Many alleged top-down effects on perception live near the border of perception and cognition, where it is not always obvious whether a cognitive state affects what we see or only our inferences or judgments.

    “Many alleged top-down effects on perception live near the border of perception and cognition, where it is not always obvious whether a given cognitive state affects what we see or instead only our inferences or judgments made on the basis of what we see.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    Judgment-based alternative explanations for top-down effects have been severely underappreciated in recent work.

    “we contend that judgment-based alternative explanations for topdown effects have been severely underappreciated in recent work.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Other purported top-down effects similarly explicable by judgment include effects on visually estimated weight, estimated looming of spiders, and rated anger in African-American or Arab faces.

    “Other purported top-down effects that seem similarly explicable include effects on visually estimated weight (Doerrfeld et al. 2012), the estimated looming of spiders (Riskind et al. 1995), and the rated anger in African-American or Arab faces (Maner et al. 2005).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Doerrfeld et al. 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Riskind et al. 1995

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Maner et al. 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Studies that manipulate stimuli often acknowledge the possibility of low-level differences and sometimes attempt to control for them.

    “Studies that manipulate stimuli often do acknowledge the possibility of low-level differences (and on occasion actively attempt to control for them).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The distinction between perception and judgment is intuitive and uncontroversial in principle, but few discussions of top-down effects mention judgmental effects as possible alternative explanations.

    “The distinction between perception and judgment is intuitive and uncontroversial in principle, but it is striking just how few discussions of top-down effects on perception even mention judgmental effects as possible alternative explanations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Similar demand-based explanations are plausible for reported effects of desirability on distance perception, racial identity on faces' perceived lightness, stereotypes on weapon/tool identity, tool use on perceived distance, scary music on interpretation of ambiguous figures, and fear of heights on perceived height.

    “similar explanations seem eminently plausible for reported effects of desirability on distance perception (e.g., the estimated distance of feces vs. chocolate; Balcetis & Dunning 2010), of racial identity on faces' perceived lightness (Levin & Banaji 2006), of stereotypes on the identity of weapons and tools (Correll et al. 2015), of tool use on the perceived distance to reachable targets (Witt et”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Balcetis & Dunning 2010

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Levin & Banaji 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Correll et al. 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    Many studies of top-down effects never mention the possibility of demand-based effects.

    “Yet, so many studies never even mention the possibility of demand-based effects (including several studies mentioned above, e.g., Mitterer et al. 2009;Prinz & Seidel 2012).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Mitterer et al. 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Prinz & Seidel 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    Assessing demand effects is often easy and cost-free.

    “This is especially frustrating because assessing demand effects is often easy and cost-free.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    The Levin and Banaji finding is widely regarded as one of the strongest counterexamples to modularity.

    “This finding is today widely regarded as one of the strongest counterexamples to modularity (e.g., Collins & Olson 2014;Macpherson 2012;Vetter & Newen 2014)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Collins & Olson 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Macpherson 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Vetter & Newen 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The Black face has a darker jawline, whereas the White face has darker eyes.

    “And the Black face has a darker jawline, whereas the White face has darker eyes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    After blurring, the vast majority of observers asserted that the two faces had the same race or were even the same person.

    “After blurring, the vast majority of observers asserted that the two faces actually had the same race (or were even the same person).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    Many top-down effects in Figure 2 are caricatured because when not caricatured readers could not understand the claims because they could not experience the effect.

    “You may notice that many of the top-down effects in Figure 2 are caricatured, e.g., with actual luminance differences for positive vs. negative words and smiling vs. frowning faces.This is because when the effects weren't caricatured in this way, readers could not understand the claimsbecause they could not experience the effect!”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    The six pitfalls cover at least nine times as many empirical reports of top-down effects as there are pitfalls.

    “Indeed, merely considering our six pitfallsuniquely disconfirmatory predictions, judgment, task demands, low-level differences, peripheral attention, and memorywe have covered at least nine times that many empirical reports of top-down effects (and of course that includes only those top-down effects we had space to discuss, out of a much larger pool).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    The median publication year of the many top-down reports cited in this paper is 2010.

    “(For example, the median publication year of the many top-down reports cited in this paperwhich includes New-Look-era reportsis only 2010.)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The facilitation-by-congruency effect occurs even in the absence of response bias shifts, as response criterion c did not change significantly across congruency conditions.

    “It occurs even in the absence of response bias shifts, given that the response criterion c did not change significantly across congruency conditions for both happiness and anger detection”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingcitation

    Participants who correctly distinguished the race of the noninverted faces also were more likely to judge that the Black face was darker.

    “Baker and Levin found that participants who correctly distinguished the race of the noninverted faces also were more likely to judge that the Black face was darker.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingcitation

    Instructing participants to view meaningless symbols as meaningful rotated numbers 2 and 5 improved visual search efficiency.

    “For example, Lupyan and Spivey (2008) found that instructing participants to view the meaningless symbols and as meaningfulrotated numbers 2 and 5improved visual search efficiency.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lupyan and Spivey (2008)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    Motivational factors rapidly and profoundly influence neuronal responses at the earliest modality-specific perceptual stages, resulting in increased gain and/or altered tuning curves.

    “Research conducted in alert animals has long recognized that motivational factors rapidly and profoundly influence neuronal responses at the earliest modality-specific perceptual stages, resulting in increased gain and/or altered tuning curves (McGann 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites McGann 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingcitation

    Tonotopic map remodeling within primary auditory cortex optimizes the processing of tones paired with rewards or punishers.

    “Findings collected across a range of mammalian species have demonstrated tonotopic map remodeling within primary auditory cortex that optimizes the processing of tones paired with rewards or punishers (Weinberger 2004).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Weinberger 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    When an unexpected E traveled across the screen, those tracking the letters were more likely to notice it than those tracking the digits, and this pattern reversed when the unexpected object was its mirror image, a block-letter 3.

    “When an unexpected E traveled across the screen, those tracking the letters were more likely to notice it than those tracking the digits, and this pattern reversed when the unexpected object was its mirror image, a block-letter 3.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Most 2013

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Any apparent top-down effect that falls prey to one or more of these pitfalls would be compromised, in the sense that it could be explained by deflationary, routine, and certainly nonrevolutionary factors.

    “We contend that any apparent top-down effect that falls prey to one or more of these pitfalls would be compromised, in the sense that it could be explained by deflationary, routine, and certainly nonrevolutionary factors.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Crossmodal effects have been conclusively established and are common ground for all parties in this discussion.

    “the existence of crossmodal effects has been conclusively established and is common ground for all parties in this discussion.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Shams et al. 2000

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Sekuler et al. 1997

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Parts of visual cortex are involved in imagery, recall, and reward processing.

    “Even parts of visual cortex, for example, are involved in imagery (e.g., Kosslyn 2005), recall (e.g., Le Bihan et al. 1993), and reward processing (Vickery et al. 2011)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Kosslyn 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Le Bihan et al. 1993

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Vickery et al. 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    These studies all fall prey to only a handful of pitfalls; nearly all of the recent literature on top-down effects is susceptible to a surprisingly small group of such pitfalls.

    “In particular, and despite their variety, we suggest that these studies all fall prey to only a handful of pitfalls.”
    • Also stated in: § 4. The six "pitfalls" of top-down effects on perception · hedged
      “We suggest that this research falls prey to a set of”
    • Also stated in: § 4. The six "pitfalls" of top-down effects on perception · hedged
      “1.They are few in number.We suggest that nearly all of the recent literature on top-down effects is susceptible to a surprisingly small group of such pitfalls.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Top-down factors are entirely missing from contemporary vision science textbooks.

    “Similarly, such factors are entirely missing from contemporary vision science textbooks (e.g., Blake & Sekuler 2005;Howard & Rogers 2002;Yantis 2013).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Blake & Sekuler 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Howard & Rogers 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Yantis 2013

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    The existence of descending neural pathways has been conclusively established many times over, and they are now firmly part of the orthodoxy in our understanding of neural systems.

    “The existence of descending neural pathways has been conclusively established many times over, and they are now firmly part of the orthodoxy in our understanding of neural systems.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Other critiques identified theoretically puzzling moderating variables or reported that many other valuable objects and symbols failed to produce similar results.

    “and other critiques identified theoretically puzzling moderating variables or reported that many other valuable objects and symbols failed to produce similar results (e.g., Klein et al. 1951;McCurdy 1956).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Klein et al. 1951

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites McCurdy 1956

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Closing your eyes (or turning off the lights) changes only the input to perception; it does not change perceptual processing itself.

    “Closing your eyes (or turning off the lights) changes only the input to perception; it does not change perceptual processing itself.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    A confirmatory-only research strategy misses half of the possible decisive evidence.

    “in our view this strategy essentially misses out on half of the possible decisive evidence.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Stefanucci and Geuss (2009) reported that holding a wide rod across one's body makes the distance between two poles look narrower, as measured by adjusting a measuring tape.

    “holding a wide rod across one's body (Fig. 2E) reportedly makes the distance between two poles (which form a doorway-like aperture) look narrower, as measured by having subjects instruct the experimenter to adjust a measuring tape to visually match the aperture's width.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Stefanucci & Geuss 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Such changes don't involve any penetration because they don't involve effects of knowledge per se.

    “However, such changes don't involve any penetration because they don't involve effects of knowledge per se.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Today's alleged top-down effects on perception are effects of motivation, action, emotion, categorization, and language.

    “Roughly, today's alleged top-down effects on perception are effects of motivation, action, emotion, categorization, and language.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Banerjee et al. (2012) reported that reflecting on unethical actions makes the world look darker.

    “the report that reflecting on unethical actions makes the world look darker (Banerjee et al. 2012; Fig. 2O).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Banerjee et al. 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The El Greco fallacy applies to any constant-error distortion that should affect equally the means of reproduction and the item reproduced.

    “the El Greco fallacy applies to any constant-error distortion that should affect equally the means of reproduction (e.g., canvases, grayscale patches) and the item reproduced (e.g., visual scenes to be painted, bright rooms).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The sounds' effects occur whether you like it or not, and they occur extremely quickly (less than 100 ms).

    “The sounds' effects occur”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Shams et al. 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Experimental hypotheses can be tested in two ways: by observing an effect when the theory calls for it, and by not observing an effect when the theory demands its absence.

    “In general, experimental hypotheses can be tested in two sorts of ways: Not only should you observe an effect when your theory calls for it, but also you should not observe an effect when your theory demands its absence.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The thesis of cognitive impenetrability constrains the information modules can access, but it does not constrain what modules can do with the input they do receive.

    “(Put more generally, the thesis of cognitive impenetrability constrains the information modules can access, but it does not constrain what modules can do with the input they do receive; e.g., Scholl & Leslie 1999.)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Scholl & Leslie 1999

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    The particular theoretical motivations behind the various results are nonuniform.

    “However, the particular theoretical motivations behind these various results are nonuniform, so it will be useful to understand these studies in groups.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The Caruso et al. effect is more likely explained by darker photos seeming more negative and conservatives deeming them more representative because they think more negatively about Obama.

    “it seems more likely that darker photos (or darker skin tones) seemed more negative to subjects, and that conservatives deemed them more representative (and liberals less representative) for that reasonbecause conservatives think more negatively about Obama than liberals do.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    An alternative explanation for the heavy-ball effect is that subjects only judged the target to be farther, without a real change in perception.

    “However, another possibility is that subjects only judged the target to be farther, even without a real change in perception.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Meier et al. (2007) reported that subjects judged gray patches darker after reading negative versus positive words, and judged negative words printed in gray ink darker than positive words.

    “Subjects judged gray patches to be darker after reading negative (vs. positive) words, and subjects judged words printed in gray ink to be darker if the words were negative (vs. positive), as measured by selecting a darker grayscale patch to match the word's lightness (Meier et al. 2007; Fig. 2G).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Meier et al. 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Wesp et al. (2004) reported that less-accurate dart throwing led to smaller target-size estimates.

    “it was reported that accuracy in throwing darts at a target affected subsequent size judgments of the target, which was initially assumed to reflect a perceptual change: Less-accurate throwing led to smaller target-size estimates, as if one's performance perceptually resized the target (Wesp et al. 2004; Fig. 2F).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wesp et al. 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Witt et al. (2004) reported that throwing a heavy ball rather than a light ball increases estimates of a target's distance.

    “It has been reported that throwing a heavy ball (rather than a light ball) at a target increases estimates of that target's distance (Witt et al. 2004).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Witt et al. 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Wesp and Gasper (2012) replicated the dart-throwing size effect but found that telling subjects the darts were faulty eliminated the correlation between performance and reported size.

    “the same research group (Wesp & Gasper 2012) replicated the earlier resultbut then ran a follow-up condition in which, before throwing, subjects were told that the darts were faulty and inaccurate.This additional instruction eliminated the correlation between performance and reported size.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wesp & Gasper 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Meier et al.'s pair of results commits the El Greco fallacy because if reading negative words makes gray patches look darker, the gray patches from the second result should also have looked darker and cancel.

    “Here too is an El Greco fallacy: if, per the first result, reading negative words makes gray patches look darker, then the gray patches from the second result should also have looked darker, and the effects of one should have canceled out the other.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Effective demos can provide especially compelling evidence and may directly rule out task demands and postperceptual judgments.

    “effective demos can provide especially compelling evidence, and they may often directly rule out the kinds of worries we expressed in discussing the previous two pitfalls (i.e., task demands and postperceptual judgments).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In the backpack/slant study, many subjects explicitly articulated the experimental hypothesis when asked, and only those subjects showed the backpack effect.

    “many subjects explicitly articulated the experimental hypothesis when askedand only those subjects showed the backpack effect (Durgin et al. 2009).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Durgin et al. 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The backpack effect on slant estimates can be explained by subjects modifying their responses to suit the experimental circumstances.

    “But another explanation is that subjects modified their responses to suit the experimental circumstances, in which a very conspicuous manipulation (a curiously unexplained backpack) was administered before obtaining a single perceptual judgment (regarding the hill's slant).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Demand effects can be mitigated by nontransparent manipulations or indirect measures, and can often be assessed by asking subjects about the experiment during debriefing.

    “although demand effects can be mitigated by nontransparent manipulations or indirect measures, they can also often be assessed by simply asking the subjects about the experimentfor example, during a careful postexperiment debriefing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationcitation

    In light of recent findings concerning task demands, it is no longer possible to provide compelling evidence for a top-down effect on perception without considering the experiment's social context.

    “In light of recent findings concerning task demands in studies of top-down effects on perception (especially Durgin et al. 2009), it is no longer possible to provide compelling evidence for a top-down effect on perception without considering the experiment's social context.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Durgin et al. 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Low-level differences are even more pervasive and problematic than has been realized, and simple experimental designs can reveal when such differences are responsible for apparent top-down effects.

    “we contend that such low-level differences are even more pervasive and problematic than has been realized, and that simple experimental designs can reveal when such differences are responsible for apparent top-down effects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Levin and Banaji (2006) reported that Black faces look darker than White faces, even when matched for mean luminance.

    “a report that Black (i.e., African-American) faces look darker than White (i.e., Caucasian) faces, even when matched for mean luminance, as in Figure 3A (Levin & Banaji 2006).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Levin & Banaji 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Claims of top-down effects can no longer be credible without at least asking about and reporting subjects' beliefs about the experiment.

    “we contend that claims of top-down effects (especially in studies using transparent manipulations) can no longer be credible without at least asking aboutand reportingsubjects' beliefs about the experiment.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Durgin et al. (2011a) found that changing instructions to hit the gift card directly led subjects to throw the beanbag farther, as expected if strategic throwing explained the initial results.

    “A follow-up study (Durgin et al. 2011a) tested these possibilities directly and found that slightly changing the instructions so that the challenge was to hit the gift card directly (rather than land closest) led subjects to throw the beanbag farther”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Durgin et al. 2011a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Balcetis and Dunning (2010) reported that subjects undershoot a $25 gift card but not a $0 gift card, suggesting more desirable objects look closer.

    “it has been reported that, when subjects can win a gift card taped to the ground if they throw a beanbag closer to the gift card than their peers do, subjects undershoot the gift card if it is worth $25 but not if it is worth $0suggesting (to the original authors) that more desirable objects look closer (Balcetis & Dunning 2010; Fig. 2P).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Balcetis & Dunning 2010

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Vision experiments occur in controlled environments, but any such environment is also inevitably a social environment.

    “Vision experiments occur in a variety of controlled environments (including the laboratory), but any such environment is also inevitably a social environment”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Hansen et al. (2006) and Olkkonen et al. (2008) reported that knowledge of an object's typical color influences perceived color, such that a grayscale banana is judged more than 20% yellow.

    “knowledge of an object's typical color (e.g., that bananas are yellow) reportedly influences that object's perceived color, such that a grayscale image of a banana is judged to be more than 20% yellow (Hansen et al. 2006;Olkkonen et al. 2008)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Hansen et al. 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Olkkonen et al. 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    In the vast majority of cases, relevant studies never considered most of the pitfalls.

    “Moreover, in the vast majority of cases, it's not that the relevant studies attempted to address these pitfalls but failed; rather, it's that they seem never to have considered most of the pitfalls in the first place.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    In the face stimuli, the Black face seems to be under illumination, whereas the White face does not look particularly illuminated or shiny, a difference known to influence perceived lightness.

    “a close examination of the face stimuli in Figure 3A suggests that the Black face seems to be under illumination, whereas the White face doesn't look particularly illuminated or shinya difference that has long been known to influence perceived lightness (Adelson 2000;Gilchrist & Jacobsen 1984).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Adelson 2000

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Gilchrist & Jacobsen 1984

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Levin et al. (2001) reported that categorical differences facilitate visual search with line drawings of animals and artifacts.

    “reports that categorical differences facilitate visual search with line drawings of animals and artifactse.g., with faster and more efficient searches for animals among artifacts, and vice versa (Levin et al. 2001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Levin et al. 2001

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Dogs are more geometrically similar to each other than they are to shoes, and size contrast may be influenced by such geometric similarity.

    “However, dogs are also more geometrically similar to each other than they are to shoes (for example, the shoe images were shorter, wider, and differently oriented than the dog images; Fig. 2L), and size contrast may instead be influenced by such geometric similarity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Voluntary attention perceptually darkens transparent surfaces, which could explain the increase in perceived transparency among thirsty observers.

    “And this is to say nothing of attentional effects on other visual propertiessuch as the fact that voluntary attention perceptually darkens transparent surfaces (Tse 2005), which could explain the increase in perceived transparency among thirsty observers (Changizi & Hall 2001; Fig. 2B) if nonthirsty observers simply paid more attention during the task (being less distracted by their thirst).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Tse 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Changizi & Hall 2001

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Visual attention may be both necessary and sufficient for apparent effects of action on perception, suggesting they reduce to routine attention-perception interactions.

    “That visual attention may be both necessary and sufficient for such effects suggests that apparent effects of action on perception may reduce to more routine and wellknown interactions between attention and perception.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Attention is almost never empirically explored in this literature.

    “On the other hand, given this prominence in theoretical discussions of top-down effects, it is curious that attention is almost never empirically explored in this literaturecurious especially given that such effects are often straightforwardly testable.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Attended items can be seen as larger, which challenges the interpretation of nearly every alleged top-down effect on size perception.

    “For example, findings suggesting that attended items can be seen as larger (Anton-Erxleben et al. 2007) immediately challenge the interpretation of nearly every alleged top-down effect on size perception, including reported effects of throwing performance on perceived target size (e.g., Cañal-Bruland et al. 2010; Fig. 2F), of balance on the perceived size of a walkable beam (Geuss et al. 2010), of”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Anton-Erxleben et al. 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    The effect of hunger on identification of food-related words could be due to hungry subjects having activated relevant memory representations before stimulus presentation.

    “In another example, hungry subjects more accurately identified briefly presented food-related words relative to subjects who were not hungry (Radel & Clément-Guillotin 2012); but if hungry subjects were simply thinking about food more than nonhungry subjects were, then it is no surprise that they better recognized words related to what they were thinking about, having activated the relevant”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Radel & Clément-Guillotin 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Switches in the Necker cube's interpretation are driven by changes in which corner of the cube is attended, and the same has been found for other ambiguous figures.

    “For example, switches in the Necker cube's interpretation are driven by changes in which corner of the cube is attended (Peterson & Gibson 1991;Toppino 2003), and the same has been found for other ambiguous figures (for a review, see Long & Toppino 2004).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Peterson & Gibson 1991

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Toppino 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Long & Toppino 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Verbal shadowing impairs subjects' ability to notice changes to objects' identities but not to their spatial configuration, suggesting that labels enhance contentful memories rather than visual processing.

    “Indeed, in similar contexts, the prevention of such labeling by verbal shadowing impairs subjects' ability to notice changes to objects' identities (e.g., a Coke bottle changing into a cardboard box) but not to their spatial configuration (e.g., a Coke bottle moving from one location in the scene to another), suggesting that the work done by such labels is to enhance contentful memories rather”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Simons 1996

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    When the memory component of the task was reduced by keeping a cue image on-screen, the labeling advantage disappeared, suggesting that memory was responsible.

    “Under these conditions, the label advantage disappeared, suggesting that memory was the culprit all along.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Klemfuss et al. (2012)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    These results suggest that relatedness is the key factor in such effects, and thus that memory, not perception, improves detection of words related to morality.

    “These results suggest that relatedness is the key factor in such effects, and thus that memory, not perception, improves detection of words related to morality.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given

    Many recent studies of recognition do not acknowledge that a memory interpretation is important or interesting.

    “Yet, it is striking how many recent studies of recognition (including nearly all of those mentioned in sect.4.6) do not even acknowledge that such an interpretation is important or interesting.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Modern discussions agree that, to be compelling, top-down effects must not merely operate through attention.

    “Nevertheless, these recent discussions happily agree that, to be compelling, top-down effects must not merely operate through attention.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Collins & Olson 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Vetter & Newen 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The moral words could have primed each other and been easier to recognize for that reason rather than because of anything special about morality.

    “In that case, it could be that the moral words simply primed each other and were easier to recognize for that reason rather than because of anything special about morality.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Sensory information is meaningless without experience and knowledge.

    “Any kind of information the sensory organs receive is meaningless because there is no inherent meaning in sensory information without experience and knowledge (Proulx 2011)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Proulx 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Behavior is multiply determined by cognitive processes.

    “Second, behavior is multiply determined by cognitive processes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If unconscious inference plays a role in perception, then there must be some role of recognition and judgment even for low-level perception.

    “But if unconscious inference plays a role in perception, as it certainly does even in the perception of a red object, then there must be some role of recognition and judgment even for low-level perception.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Perception is not a unitary construct but is composed of multiple components.

    “First, perception is not a unitary construct but is composed of multiple components.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    If reported effects of desires on perceived size are explained simply by increased attention to the desired object, then such an effect is not a revolutionary discovery about perception.

    “If it turns out, for example, that reported effects of desires on perceived size are explained simply by increased attention to the desired object, then such an effect will go from being a revolutionary discovery about the nature of perception to being simply a demonstration that people pay attention to objects they like.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Emberson and Amso (2012) argued that changes in visual percepts arise from activity in learning and memory systems, not that activity in perceptual systems is evidence for a top-down effect.

    “The argument made by Emberson and Amso (2012) is not that one can find activity in perceptual systems as evidence for a top-down effect but rather that changes in visual percepts arise from activity in learning and memory systems.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Emberson and Amso (2012)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Levin and Banaji (2006) report several other experiments with similar conclusions.

    “Levin and Banaji (2006) report several other experiments with similar conclusions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Levin and Banaji (2006)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    After perceptual input reaches the retina, multiple brain regions operate on the input-selecting the significant from the mundane, often by emotion or motivation, and some via top-down re-entrant processes-to construct perceptual experience.

    “After perceptual input reaches the retina, multiple brain regions operate on the inputselecting the significant from the mundane (Lim et al. 2009), often by emotion (Anderson & Phelps 2001) or motivation (Egner & Hirsch 2005), and some via top-down re-entrant processes (Gilbert & Li 2013)to construct perceptual experience.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Lim et al. 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Anderson & Phelps 2001

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Egner & Hirsch 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Long-term users of sensory substitution devices who once had vision have visual imagery evoked immediately by the sounds they hear with a device, and express that they have the perception of sight.

    “there is evidence that long-term users of such devices who once had vision (who had acquired blindness) have visual imagery that is evoked immediately by the sounds they hear with a device, and therefore express that they have the perception of sight (Ward & Meijer 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ward & Meijer 2010

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    New Look proponents faced similar criticisms from the beginning.

    “Indeed, from the beginning, New Look proponents faced similar criticisms.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bruner and Goodman (1947)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Some connections between the senses are direct and low-level.

    “Although some connections between the senses appear to be direct and low-level (Meredith & Stein 1986)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Meredith & Stein 1986

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Other connections between the senses are the product of learning and experience.

    “others certainly are the product of learning and experience (Proulx et al. 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Proulx et al. 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The primary fuel for alternative conceptions of perception is the presence of many empirical reports of top-down influences on perception.

    “Though many alternative conceptions of what perception is and how it works have deep theoretical foundations and motivations, we suspect that the primary fuel for such alternative conceptions is simply the presence of so many empirical reports of top-down influences on perceptionespecially in the tidal wave of such effects appearing over the last two decades.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    None of these other experiments involve subjectively appreciable demonstrations.

    “None of these other experiments involve subjectively appreciable demonstrations, however”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Levin and Banaji (2006)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The observers were explicitly told that the study was about

    “because the observers were explicitly told that the study was about”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Levin and Banaji (2006)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Crossmodal perception is the norm, rather than the exception.

    “Crossmodal perception is the norm, rather than the exception”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ghazanfar & Schroeder 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Sensory substitution devices allow someone with a damaged sensory modality to receive missing information by transforming it into a format another intact sensory modality can process.

    “Sensory substitution devices allow someone with a damaged sensory modality (such as the visual system for the visually impaired) to receive the missing information by transforming it into a format that another intact sensory modality (such as the auditory [Meijer 1992] or somatosensory system [Bach-y-Rita & Kercel 2003]) can process.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Meijer 1992

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Bach-y-Rita & Kercel 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Morality is not modular.

    “Accordingly, we do not think morality is modular, either (Van Bavel et al. 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Van Bavel et al. 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    If brains resonate with similarity of motor and affective states, bodily actions may behave as affectively polarized primes that preactivate representations of emotionally related facial features.

    “If brains resonate with the similarity of motor and affective states (Niedenthal et al. 2010), bodily actions may behave as affectively polarized primes that preactivate the representations of emotionally related facial features, thus facilitating the encoding of features belonging to the same, rather than to a different, valence domain.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Niedenthal et al. 2010

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Attention is often inextricably intertwined with perception, and it is deployed not only to spatial regions, but also to sensory dimensions, learned dimensions, and learned complex configurations.

    “Attention is often inextricably intertwined with perception, and it is deployed not only to spatial regions, but also to sensory dimensions, learned dimensions, and learned complex configurations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Expressive qualities are phenomenally objective and show a remarkable dependence on configural stimulus properties.

    “Despite being commonly conceived as subjective, expressive qualities are phenomenally objective (i.e., perceived as belonging to the object; Köhler 1929;1938) and show a remarkablethough not exclusivedependence on configural stimulus properties.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Köhler 1929

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [1938]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Recurrent connections are particularly important when processing degraded inputs, and they serve to strengthen weak bottom-up signals.

    “These recurrent connections are particularly important when processing degraded inputs, and they serve to strengthen weak bottom-up signals (Wyatte et al. 2012).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wyatte et al. 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Categorical perception exists and seems to contradict F&S.

    “The existence of categorical perception (Goldstone & Hendrickson 2010) seems to contradict F&S.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Goldstone & Hendrickson 2010

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Semantic memory plays some role in the moral pop-out effect, but this does not rule out that the motivational relevance of morality boosts related content to awareness.

    “Accordingly, it is trivially true that semantic memory plays some role in the moral popout effect (how else would our participants know words like kill and die), yet this does not rule out that the motivational relevance of morality (or any motivationally relevant construct) boosts related content to awareness.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    With training, dimensions that were originally fused can become more perceptually separated, and once this occurs, attention can select the separate dimensions.

    “However, with training, dimensions that were originally fused can become more perceptually separated (Goldstone & Steyvers 2001), and once this occurs, it becomes possible for attention to select the separate dimensions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Goldstone & Steyvers 2001

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Perceptual changes affect what can be attended, and attention affects what is perceptually learned.

    “Perceptual changes affect what can be attended, and attention affects what is perceptually learned (Shiu & Pashler 1992).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Shiu & Pashler 1992

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Attention influences perceptual processes at many stages and sometimes with a high degree of specificity.

    “The problem with generalizing this kind of account is that attention influences perceptual processes at many stages and sometimes with a high degree of specificity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Moral words are not explicitly encoded in semantic memory as moral terms or as having significant overlapping content.

    “We suspect that moral words are not explicitly encoded in semantic memory as moral terms or as having significant overlapping content.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Categorical perception can be acquired during individual experience and constitutes a paradigmatic case of observer-dependent, familiarity-mediated sensitivity change.

    “Categorical perception can be acquired during individual experience (Beale & Keil 1995), and it constitutes a paradigmatic case of observer-dependent, familiarity-mediated sensitivity change.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Beale & Keil 1995

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Our evidence challenges the bold claim that cognition does not affect perception, supports a circumscribed penetrability of affective perception, and suggests indirect affective priming as a candidate mechanism.

    “To summarize, our evidence challenges the bold claim that cognition does not affect perception, supports a circumscribed penetrability of affective perception, and suggests indirect affective priming as a candidate mechanism by which observer's states mold perceptual properties experienced as phenomenally objective and yet loaded with meaning.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The boundary between peripheral attention shifts and changes to perception is entirely unclear and potentially artificial.

    “Because of the wide range of attentional effectsfrom centrally oriented modulations of percept selection, to adjustments of gain to certain features, to the extreme case of head-turningthe boundary between peripheral attention shifts and changes to perception is entirely unclear and potentially artificial.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Our studies challenge any bold claim against penetrability of perception and suggest that perceptual theory can benefit from demonstrations of how observer's states can mold expressive qualities.

    “Our studies challenge any bold claim against penetrability of perception and suggest that perceptual theory can benefit from demonstrations of howunder controlled circumstancesobserver's states can mold expressive qualities.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Anterior IT object-selective and face-selective cells have very large RFs (10°-50°) and require large (>5°) stimuli for activation.

    “At the pinnacle of the hierarchy we find anterior IT”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ito et al. 1995

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Inputs from prefrontal cortex reach first IT cortex; some outputs from IT reach V1 directly and some via V4→V2→V1 route.

    “For example, inputs originating at the prefrontal cortex reach first the IT cortex; some outputs from the IT cortex reach V1 directly and some reach it via the V4→V2→V1 route (Gilbert & Wu 2013).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gilbert & Wu 2013

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Athletes, musicians, coaches, doctors, and gourmets are familiar with engaging in training methods for improving their own perceptual performances.

    “Athletes, musicians, coaches, doctors, and gourmets are all familiar with engaging in training methods for improving their own perceptual performances (Goldstone et al. 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Goldstone et al. 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    When we see a face, we perceive it as an integrated whole, but at the same time we are consciously aware of all minute spatial elements.

    “When we see a face, for example, we perceive it as an integrated whole, but at the same time we are consciously aware of all of the minute spatial elements that make up that face.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Information converges in successive hierarchical stages from V1 to V2, V4, IT, resulting in cells with increasingly large RFs that cannot encode spatial details but may be selective to global features.

    “From these preintegration response patterns, information converges in successive hierarchical stages, from V1 orientation-selective cells through downstream cortical areas V2, V4, and the inferotemporal cortex (IT).This successive convergence results in cells having increasingly large receptive fields (RFs) that cannot encode spatial details but may be selective to global features such as size, or”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Those details are perceived instantaneously and in parallel.

    “Those details are perceived instantaneously and in parallel.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Almost all top-down information reaches V1 via layer 1, where spatial extent of synaptic connectivity is spread out.

    “Almost all top-down information reaches V1 via layer 1 (see summary Fig. 1 in Gur & Snodderly 2008), where the spatial extent of its synaptic connectivity is rather spread out (Rockland 1994).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Gur & Snodderly 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Rockland 1994

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The perceptual ability to transform individual spatial elements into holistic objects is instantaneous and parallel, arguing for feed-forward, encapsulated perception.

    “We also note that the perceptual ability to transform individual spatial elements into holistic objects is instantaneous and parallelwhich argues for a feed-forward, encapsulated perception.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Modern neuroanatomy reveals that the brain is better understood as one large, interconnected network of neurons, bathed in a chemical system, that can be parsed as a set of broadly distributed, dynamically changing, interacting systems.

    “Modern neuroanatomy reveals that the brain is better understood as one large, interconnected network of neurons, bathed in a chemical system, that can be parsed as a set of broadly distributed, dynamically changing, interacting systems”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Marder 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Sporns 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites van den Heuvel & Sporns 2013

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    In visual cortex, objects in full details are represented by V1 response patterns while global information is extracted by information-integrating cells at various visual areas.

    “Thus, in the visual cortex, objects in their full details are represented by V1 response patterns while the global information for each object that is required for comparing the acute image to its stored prototype (”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    These systems are domain general: their interactions constitute mental phenomena that we consider distinct, such as perception, cognition, emotion, and action.

    “These systems are domain general: Their interactions constitute mental phenomena that we consider distinct, such as perception, cognition, emotion, and action”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Anderson 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Barrett 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Pessoa 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Top-down influences typically drive perception, and are constrained or corrected by incoming sensory inputs, rather than the other way around.

    “This means that top-down influences typically drive perception, and are constrained or corrected by incoming sensory inputs, rather than the other way around.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    These assumptions, and the conclusion they support, are untenable given the considerable neuroscientific evidence that processing in the human brain is distributed, active, and exquisitely sensitive to context.

    “These assumptions, and the conclusion they support, are untenable given the considerable neuroscientific evidence that processing in the human brain is distributed, active, and exquisitely sensitive to context.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    About 10%-30% of individuals who suffer from a severe visual impairment, such as glaucoma, experience Charles Bonnet syndrome (CBS).

    “About 10%-30% of individuals who suffer from a severe visual impairment, such as glaucoma, experience Charles Bonnet syndrome (CBS; Schultz et al. 1996;Vukicevic & Fitzmaurice 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Schultz et al. 1996

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Vukicevic & Fitzmaurice 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Seemingly distinct mental phenomena are implemented as dynamic brain states, not as individual, static mental organs.

    “Seemingly distinct mental phenomena are implemented as dynamic brain states, not as individual, static mental organs”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    These examples show that top-down cognitive processes are not only able to penetrate visual perceptions, but also they can cause them.

    “These examples show that top-down cognitive processes are not only able to penetrate visual perceptions, but also they can cause them.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Levin and Banaji (2006) demonstrated that participants seem to perceive Black faces to be darker than White faces.

    “Levin and Banaji (2006) demonstrated that participants seem to perceive Black faces to be darker than White faces.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Levin and Banaji (2006)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    F&S apply an unjustified level of skepticism about top-down effects relative to other broad hypotheses about the sources of perceptual intelligence.

    “In addition, we argue that F&S apply unjustified level of skepticism about top-down effects relative to other broad hypotheses about the sources of perceptual intelligence.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Pure visual hallucinations are possible and are associated with hyperconnectivity between the amygdala and the visual cortex.

    “However, pure visual hallucinations are also possible and are associated with hyperconnectivity between the amygdala and the visual cortex (Ford et al. 2015), underscoring the role of top-down feedback in their formation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ford et al. 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Capacity limits of cognition are different from those of perception; humans are restricted to representing links between four variables or fewer in a single cognitive representation.

    “Capacity limits of cognition are different from those of perception, and as humans, we are restricted to representing links between four variables (a quaternary relationship) or fewer in a single cognitive representation”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Halford et al. 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Hallucinations and mental imagery are examples where perception is not only influenced by, but also driven by, top-down effects.

    “In this commentary, we present two examples where perception is not only influenced by, but also in fact driven by, top-down effects: hallucinations and mental imagery.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The main thrust of F&S's critique is based on folk categories of perception and cognition as reified in a modular, reactive, and context-insensitive brain.

    “But the main thrust of their critique is based on folk categories of perception and cognition as reified in a modular, reactive, and context-insensitive brain.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    F&S implicitly assume that top-down effects would uniformly influence all elements in a visual field.

    “In discussing their “El Greco” fallacy, F&S implicitly assume that top-down effects would uniformly influence all elements in a visual field.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    A top-down effect that can be partially ascribed to memory does not mean it is not (also) an effect on perception, because part of what we call memory-visual memory-appears to have a perceptual locus.

    “A top-down effect that can be partially ascribed to memory does not mean it is not (also) an effect on perception, because part of what we call memoryvisual memoryappears to have a perceptual locus (D'Esposito & Postle 2015;Pratte & Tong 2014).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites D'Esposito & Postle 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Pratte & Tong 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    These studies show that expectations and knowledge affect virtually all aspects of visual perception.

    “These studies show that expectations and knowledge affect virtually all aspects of visual perception.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    All of those assumptions are wrong.

    “All of those assumptions are wrong.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Visual memory is not a back-end system; it is perceptual.

    “Visual memory is not a back-end system, as F&S assume.It is perceptual.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Color knowledge affects color appearance of images and even color afterimages.

    “Color knowledge affects color appearance of images (Hansen et al. 2006) and even color afterimages (Lupyan 2015b).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Hansen et al. 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Lupyan 2015b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Static distinctions between perception, cognition, and emotion reflect much more about historical intellectual biases than about the true operations of the brain/mind.

    “It is quite possibleindeed it seems likelythat static distinctions between perception, cognition, and emotion reflect much more about historical intellectual biases in the field of cognitive science than about the true operations of the brain/mind.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    One can perfectly well individuate a system in terms of what it does regardless of whether the operations of the system are sensitive to information from outside.

    “In fact, one can perfectly well individuate a system in terms of what it does (e.g., what computations it performs) regardless of whether the operations of the system are sensitive to information from outside.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Early vision is cognitively impenetrable because there are no direct cognitive effects on early vision.

    “I agree that early vision is cognitively impenetrable because there are no direct cognitive effects on early vision.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    It is in virtue of stable bottom-up models that one can begin to understand how top-down effects modulate visual processing.

    “In fact, it is in virtue of stable bottom-up models that one can begin to understand how top-down effects modulate visual processing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Late vision and hence the percept is directly cognitively penetrated because the perceptual processes of late vision use cognitive information as a resource and cognition modulates the processes of late vision.

    “There is, however, substantial neuropsychological evidence that late vision and, hence, the percept is directly cognitively penetrated because the perceptual processes of late vision use cognitive information as a resource and, thus, cognition modulates the processes of late vision.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Raftopoulos 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Raftopoulos 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

    • Rests on an assumption: Late vision is the stage in which the percept is constructed.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    To this aim, attention enhances the activity of neurons in the cortical regions that encode the stimuli that most likely contain information relevant to the testing of the hypothesis.

    “To this aim, attention enhances the activity of neurons in the cortical regions that encode the stimuli that most likely contain information relevant to the testing of the hypothesis.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Attention enhances the activity of neurons in the cortical regions that encode the attended stimuli.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The aim of this interplay is to enable perceivers to respond and eventually adapt their responses as they interact with the environment so that this interaction be successful.

    “The aim of this interplay is to enable perceivers to respond and eventually adapt their responses as they interact with the environment so that this interaction be successful.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Peripheral attention selects the input to perception but does not affect how the processing operates.

    “Peripheral attention selects the input to perception but does not affect how the processing operates (ibid, sect.4.5.1, para.1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites ibid, sect.4.5.1, para.1

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    The investigation of top-down effects on perception requires a rigorous definition of what qualifies as perceptual to begin with.

    “The investigation of top-down effects on perception requires a rigorous definition of what qualifies as perceptual to begin with.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The timing of these cognitive effects places them within late vision but outside early vision, which means that late vision, but not early vision, is affected directly by cognition.

    “The timing of these cognitive effects places them within late vision but outside early vision, which means that late vision, but not early vision, is affected directly by cognition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The N2 is elicited about 200-300 ms after stimulus onset in monkeys and humans, in the area V4 and in the inferotemporal cortex.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    To perceive the world is to use what you know to explain away the sensory signal across multiple spatial and temporal scales; the process of perception is inseparable from cognitive processes.

    “Clark (2013) argues that to perceive the world is to use what you know to explain away the sensory signal across multiple spatial and temporal scales; the process of perception is inseparable from cognitive processes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Clark 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Cognition affects late vision in several ways, such as the application of concepts on some output of early vision so that hypotheses concerning the identities of distal objects can be formed and tested in order for the objects to be categorized and identified.

    “There are several ways cognition affects late vision, such as the application of concepts on some output of early vision so that hypotheses concerning the identities of distal objects can be formed and tested in order for the objects to be categorized and identified.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Success in such an endeavor relies on inferring correctly (or nearly so) the nature of the source of the incoming signal from the signal itself.

    “Success in such an endeavor relies on inferring correctly (or nearly so) the nature of the source of the incoming signal from the signal itself.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The N2 is considered to be a component of cognitively driven or sustained attention.

    “Thus, N2 is considered to be a component of cognitively driven or sustained attention.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The cognitively driven direct attentional effects within late vision contribute to testing hypotheses concerning the putative distal causes of the sensory data encoded in the lower neuronal assemblies in the visual processing hierarchy.

    “The cognitively driven direct attentional effects within late vision contribute to testing hypotheses concerning the putative distal causes of the sensory data encoded in the lower neuronal assemblies in the visual processing hierarchy.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    When perceptual behavior is explained by invoking the role of peripheral attention, even if peripheral attention is guided by cognitive states, that does not entail perception being cognitively penetrated.

    “Accordingly, the authors correctly conclude that when perceptual behavior is explained by invoking the role of peripheral attention, even if peripheral attention is guided by cognitive states, that does not entail perception being cognitively penetrated, a view also shared by the majority of philosophers (Zeimbekis & Raftopoulos 2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Zeimbekis & Raftopoulos 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    The dividing line between perception and cognition is best attained at the functional level.

    “Whereas Firestone & Scholl's (F&S's) phenomenological demarcation of perception from cognition appeals to intuition, we argue that the dividing line is best attained at the functional level.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Cognitively driven spatial and object/feature-centered attention, as expressed by the N2 ERP component, affects perceptual processing.

    “Research suggests that cognitively driven spatial and object/feature-centered attention, as expressed by the N2 Event Related Potential (ERP) component, affects perceptual processing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Chelazzi et al. 1993

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Luck 1995

      Not checked in the free run.

154 of 154

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The set of studies reporting top-down effects that the authors review is representative of all such studies.

    “we count more than 175 papers published since 1995 reporting such effects”
    “None of these hundreds of studieseither individually or collectivelyprovides compelling evidence for true top-down effects on perception”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The six pitfalls reviewed are the primary alternative explanations for reported top-down effects, and the literature review is comprehensive enough to support the claim that no alleged top-down effect has met these challenges.

    “It is our view that no alleged top-down effect of cognition on perception has so far successfully met the challenges collectively embodied by the pitfalls we have reviewed.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The studies cited as evidence for the pitfalls are methodologically sound and their findings are reliable.

    “for each alternative explanation we have offered here, we reviewed multiple case studies suggesting not only that it could matter (in principle), but also that it actually does matter (in practice)”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The hippocampus is one of the few regions of the brain that has not been found to subserve multiple functions, despite intense study for decades.

    “The hippocampus is one of the few regions of the brain that has not been found to subserve multiple”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Category priming is more likely when terms are explicitly identifiable as being in the same category or at least as having multiple overlapping semantic features.

    “Category priming is more likely when the terms are explicitly identifiable as being in the same category or at least as having multiple overlapping semantic features (e.g., pilot, airport).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Any observed behavior can be explained by multiple processes intervening between perceptual input and motor response.

    “Any observed behavior can be explained by multiple processes intervening between perceptual input and motor response.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A single process rarely explains any behavior, and possible explanations are not always mutually exclusive.

    “A single process rarely explains any behavior, and possible explanations are not always mutually exclusive.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The visual system consists of a proprietary set of mechanisms specialized for the analysis of signals originating from the retina.

    “One can characterize the visual system as the set of brain mechanisms specialized for the analysis of signals originating from the retina.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Late vision is the stage in which the percept is constructed.

    “late vision, the latter being the stage in which the percept is constructed.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Attention enhances the activity of neurons in the cortical regions that encode the attended stimuli.

    “Attention is thought to enhance the activity of neurons in the cortical regions that encode the attended stimuli.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The N2 is elicited about 200-300 ms after stimulus onset in monkeys and humans, in the area V4 and in the inferotemporal cortex.

    “The N2 is elicited about 200-300 ms after stimulus onset in monkeys and humans, in the area V4 and in the inferotemporal cortex.”
11 of 11

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous studies have shown perceptual biases with uninformative cues across a range of tasks, even in judgments of elementary visual properties like color.

    “Previous studies have shown perceptual biases with uninformative cues (i.e., mere suggestions) across a range of tasks (27), even in judgments of elementary visual properties like color (28).”

    From Social information creates self-fulfilling prophecies in judgments of pain, vicarious pain, and cognitive effort (2026) · cites this paper as [27]

    Section 4.3.2 (page unavailable) says many studies report top-down effects in perceptual judgments and discusses possible demand and response bias. Section 3.4 (page unavailable) gives examples involving color and lightness. The cited paper does not establish that the cues in those studies were uninformative or merely suggestions; it also questions whether the reported biases reflect perception rather than responses. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Humans have little access to the mechanisms underlying some of their psychology, such as perception.

    “Similarly, humans are unreliable guides to their own inner workings: they are often overconfident in their explanatory knowledge (Rozenblit & Keil, 2002) and have little access to the mechanisms underlying some of their psychology (e.g., perception, see Firestone & Scholl, 2016).”

    From Exploring the psychology of LLMs’ moral and legal reasoning (2024) · cites this paper as Firestone & Scholl, 2016

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Direction of dart-target size bias reverses

    Minor

    The paper first says inaccurate dart throwing led to smaller target-size estimates, but later describes explaining poor throws by inflating target-size estimates. These statements give opposite directions for the bias attributed to poor performance.

1 of 1

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Gibson, 1979, The ecological approach to perception and action
  2. Machery, 2015, The cognitive penetrability of perception: New philosophical perspectives
  3. Adelson, 2000, Lightness perception and lightness illusions, The new cognitive neurosciences, second edition, 339
  4. Blake, 2005, Perception, fifth edition
  5. Howard, 2002, Seeing in depth, vol. 2: Depth perception

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Firestone, C., & Scholl, B. J.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2015-07-20
Volume
39
Pages
e229-e229
ISSN
  • 0140-525X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1825
DOI
10.1017/s0140525x15000965
OpenAlex
W2129245434
Cited by
1,200
References
309
Citations by year
2026: 68 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 147 · 2022: 107 · 2021: 94 · 2020: 167 · 2019: 200 · 2018: 92 · 2017: 91 · 2016: 69 · 2015: 7
FWCI
51.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified)
Locations
  • Behavioral and Brain Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Taipei Medical University
  • Taipei Medical University-Shuang Ho Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
top-down effects, visual perception, methodological pitfalls, linguistic representation
MeSH terms
Cognition, Emotions, Humans, Visual Perception, Intention

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review