August 28,2008

鑽研?

Schlosberg H.認為,人類的表情可以跟生氣、厭惡、輕蔑、笑、驚訝、恐懼等六種情緒可相互對應。這六者的關係可以用一個六角型來表示。然而,這並不是完全的一對一,有時候某種表情也可能是表達相鄰的情感。這其中,相互比鄰的兩者,表示這兩種表情容易混淆。「厭惡」與「生氣」、「驚訝」與「恐懼」的確是很難判別。按照這個法則來看的話,「笑」跟「輕蔑」或「驚訝」竟然有類似的地方。 所以,看到某人在笑的時候,會是輕蔑或是驚訝或是真的是單純的笑?


最近有空閒時在唸一本關於心理學的大眾讀物,上段的文字大致上從裡頭擷取出,而越讀越有興趣,就不小心發揮了自己被訓練出來的追根究底老毛病而繼續從學術網路上往下找paper來唸。


EMPATH: A Neural Network that Categorizes Facial Expressions Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2002;14:1158-1173

Matthew N. Dailey and Garrison W. Cottrell,
University of California, San Diego

Curtis Padgett, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Ralph Adolphs, University of Iowa



There are two competing theories of facial expression recognition. Some researchers have suggested that it is an example of "categorical perception." In this view, expression categories are considered to be discrete entities with sharp boundaries, and discrimination of nearby pairs of expressive faces is enhanced near those boundaries. Other researchers, however, suggest that facial expression perception is more graded and that facial expressions are best thought of as points in a continuous, low-dimensional space, where, for instance, "surprise" expressions lie between "happiness" and "fear" expressions due to their perceptual similarity. In this article, we show that a simple yet biologically plausible neural network model, trained to classify facial expressions into six basic emotions, predicts data used to support both of these theories. Without any parameter tuning, the model matches a variety of psychological data on categorization, similarity, reaction times, discrimination, and recognition difficulty, both qualitatively and quantitatively. We thus explain many of the seemingly complex psychological phenomena related to facial expression perception as natural consequences of the tasks' implementations in the brain.


然後又找到了更生理相關的東西: About Faces, in Art and in the Brain (By Robert L. Solso. July 01, 2004)


其實也不是要真的開始寫什麼關於心理學與生理學的關係或表情與情緒的關連什麼的,最近開始有空就看看這些東西,其實只是自我另一層面的閱讀與理解,屬於我個人的思考,不需要在這寫出。


該怎麼說,有時越鑽越深其實是壞事,尤其發現現在時間對我來說是很很迅速就消逝的時候,又處在這個是非不分的混沌且講求速食主義台灣的時候,有時越鑽越深是種累贅,浪費時間且吃力不討好,容易被直接略過;但是也就是這種不分青紅皂白不追求證據的懶惰,也才會造就現在的這種社會型態與觀念,這絕對是壞事。應該說,很多人常忘了思考問題的本質,就決定了答案,甚至是看了答案就忘了問題本身,這是本末倒置,不該是這樣的,這樣問題還是存在。


另外一個說法是,思考問題的本身重點在於【思考】這件事,就像之前常對實驗室學弟妹說過:【Bad result is also a result.】,有時面對實驗的失敗時,應該要去面對的是思考失敗的原因然後重新釐清問題的本身(例如:實驗前的假說),而不是直接就開始直接重新實驗想不顧一切做出所謂的正確答案(例如:自己設定的假說),在台灣,太多研究室的學生都是為了做出他或老師心目中的假說而去做出可以證明假說的正確結果,結果到底假說是為何而成倒是忘了,這就造成很盲目的研究行為。Bad result is also a result,因為得到了壞結果,就可以有更多的機會去探討很多面向,為何會做出這樣的結果?哪個實驗步驟錯了?是否當初設定的假說有哪個推論或許是不符合邏輯的?有去想以上這三個問句這過程的話,不就多了個思考,這會更活絡思緒,未嘗不好?!有痛過且留下疤痕的傷是一輩子都不會忘記的,這是種經驗學習,總比直接未經過思考而盲目追求想像中的正確答案來的更實際且有助大腦些。


回到越鑽越深這件事,寧可花這樣的時間去追求真相並理解,總比直接接受資訊來的好。

Posted by chentims at 樂多Roodo! │00:19 │回應(0)引用(0)Denken
樂多分類:日記/一般 工具:編輯本文
Ads by Roodo! 

引用URL

http://cgi.blog.roodo.com/trackback/7028043