Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Perception theory: Does it make any difference?

  • Articles
  • An Analysis of Research Needs in Educational Communication and Technology — Part 1
  • Published:
ECTJ Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

References

  • Bruner, J. S. On perceptual readiness.Psychological Review, 1957,64, 123–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gellerman, L. S. Form discrimination in chimpanzees and two-year-old children.Psychology, 1933,42, 3–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. A theory of direct visual perception. In J. R. Royce & W. W. Rozeboom (Eds.),The psychology of knowing. New York: Gordon & Breach, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J.J. The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. A theory of pictorial perception.AV Communication Review, 1954, 2(1), 3–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, R. L.The intelligent eye. London: Weidenfeld, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gyr, J. W. Perception as reafference and related issues in cognition and epistemology. In J. R. Royce & W. W. Rozeboom (Eds.),The psychology of knowing. New York: Gordon & Breach, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gyr, J. W., Brown, J. S., Willey, R., & Zwian, A. Computer simulation and psychological theories of perception.Psychological Bulletin, 1966,64, 174–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadamard,J. An essay on the psychology of invention in the mathematical field. New York: Dover, 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmholtz, H. von. In S. P. C. S. Southall (Ed.),Handbook of physiological optics. New York: Dover, 1963. (Originally published, 1867.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffress, L. A. (Ed.).Cerebral mechanisms in behavior. New York: Wiley, 1951.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, J. M.A psychology of picture perception. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBerge, D. Perceptual learning and attention. In W. K. Estes (Ed.),Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (Vol. 4,Attention and memory). New York: Wiley, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, D. H. The nature of a stimulus: Some relationships between learning and perception. In S. Koch (Ed.),Psychology: A study of a science (Vol. 5). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norberg, K. Perception research and instructional technology.Viewpoints. Bulletin of the School of Education (Indiana University), 1971,47, 16–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norberg, K. Perception research and audio-visual education.AV Communication Review, 1953, 2(1), 18–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozeboom, W. W. The learning tradition. In E. C. Carterette & M. P. Friedman (Eds.),Historical and philosophic roots of perception. New York: Academic Press, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Travers, R. M. W.Essentials of learning. New York: Macmillan, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. California State University, 95819, Sacramento, CA

    Kenneth Norberg (professor emieritus)

Authors
  1. Kenneth Norberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Norberg, K. Perception theory: Does it make any difference?. ETCJ 26, 5–13 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766570

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766570

Keywords

Search

Navigation