Categorization and decision making are combined in a task with photorealistic faces. Two different types of face stimuli were assigned probabilistically into one of two fictitious groups; based on the category, faces were further probabilistically assigned to be hostile or friendly. In Part I, participants are asked to categorize a face into one of two categories, and to make a decision concerning interaction. A Markov model of categorization followed by decision making provides reasonable fits to Part I data. A Markov (...) model predicting decision making followed by categorization is rejected. In Part II, a no-parameter model predicts decisions using categorization and decision responses collected in separate trials, suggesting that Part 1 results are not an artifact of the presentation of categorization and decision questions within a single trial. Decisions concerning interaction appear to be based on information from the category decision, and not from the face stimuli alone. (shrink)

Categorization and decision making are combined in a task with photorealistic faces. Two different types of face stimuli were assigned probabilistically into one of two fictitious groups; based on the category, faces were further probabilistically assigned to be hostile or friendly. In Part I, participants are asked to categorize a face into one of two categories, and to make a decision concerning interaction. A Markov model of categorization followed by decision making provides reasonable fits to Part I data. A Markov (...) model predicting decision making followed by categorization is rejected. In Part II, a no-parameter model predicts decisions using categorization and decision responses collected in separate trials, suggesting that Part 1 results are not an artifact of the presentation of categorization and decision questions within a single trial. Decisions concerning interaction (defensive/friendly) appear to be based on information from the category decision, and not from the face stimuli alone. (shrink)

The theoretical applicability of the constructs of configurality, holism, and Gestalten are ubiquitous in perceptual psychology, yet there is a noticeable absence of a generally accepted, unified theory of Gestalt phenomena. Aside from a few quite specific models of performance in some particular sphere, rigorous definitions and quantitative models are scarce. In addition, in the realm of quantitative dynamic information-processing characteristics, definitions, proposed explanations, and derivations regarding concepts of holistic vs non-holistic objects are rare if extant at all. The primary (...) goal of this chapter is to argue for the establishment of a mathematical language within which the properties of strategic concepts that describe and purport to distinguish configural as opposed to non-configural perception can be elucidated. We do this in two ways, each of which is intended to compel formal connections among diverse operational concepts, and facilitate the translation to testable experimental hypotheses. (shrink)