Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ambiguous figures, attention, and perceptual content: reply to Jagnow

  • Published:
Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

I argued in Nanay 2010 that we cannot characterize perceptual content without reference to attention. Here, I defend this account from three objections raised by Jagnow 2011. This mainly takes the form of clarifying some details not sufficiently elaborated in the original article and dispelling some potential misunderstandings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Findlay John, M., & Gilchrist Iain, D. (2003). Active vision: the psychology of looking and seeing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Funkhouser, E. (2006). The determinable-determinate relation. Nous, 40, 548–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, J. E., & Subramaniam, B. (1995). The role of visual attention in saccadic eye movements. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 787–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jagnow, R. (2011). Ambiguous figures and spatial contents of perceptual experience. Philosophy and the Cognitive Sciences, 10, 325–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowler, E., Anderson, E., Dosher, B., & Blaser, E. (1995). The role of attention in the programming of saccades. Vision Research, 35, 1897–1916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nanay, B. (2010). Attention and perceptual content. Analysis, 70, 363–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickel, B. (2007). Against intentionalism. Philosophical Studies, 136, 279–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 2–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I. (1984). Current research in the study of selective attention. In E. Donchin (Ed.), Cognitive psychophysiology: event related potentials and the study of cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I., Walker, J. A., Friedrich, F. J., & Rafal, R. D. (1984). Effects of parietal injury on covert orienting of attention. Journal of Neuroscience, 4, 1863–1874.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stazicker, J. ms. (2010). Nanay on attention and intentionalism. Manuscript. http://berkeley.academia.edu/JamesStazicker/Papers/323588/Nanay_on_Attention_and_Intentionalism

  • Theeuwes, J. (1991). Exogenous and endogenous control of attention. Attention, Perception and Psychoshysics, 49, 83–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeshurun, Y., & Carrasco, M. (1998). Attention improves or impairs visual performance by enhancing spatial resolution. Nature, 396, 72–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Philosophical Psychology, University of Antwerp, D 413, Grote Kauwenberg 18, 2000, Antwerp, Belgium

    Bence Nanay

  2. Peterhouse, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 1RD, UK

    Bence Nanay

Authors
  1. Bence Nanay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bence Nanay.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nanay, B. Ambiguous figures, attention, and perceptual content: reply to Jagnow. Phenom Cogn Sci 10, 557–561 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-011-9221-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-011-9221-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation