Dear Daniela,

I am not an expert of cognitive psychology nor of the field of aesthetic
perceptions (although I have read much in both fields from my interest
in their value for design and design education) but I shall dare to give
you a reply to your question below. I do believe that any set of
parameters can be tested if these can be isolated through the design of
experiment or by the use of appropriate filters, software hardware
conceptual etc., however the key question is whether you have a
hypothesis which is to be tested and if such an isolation will deliver
new insights which can be put to test your hypothesis. In the area of
visual perception, it is indeed difficult to isolate parameters, but it
has been done in the past through some wonderful and brilliant
experiments in cognitive psychology, although in order to build a valid
experiment you are "scientifically" required to be able to replicate the
situation and the finding through independent action. The use of
tachistoscopes to time the exposure of images, using paired images on
cards to compare sets of images etc., are some examples that have
delivered remarkable insights into cognition and perception. Cognitive
ergonomists do delelop experiments and methods of analysis, quite
regularly, that can give reasonable and reliable data on a variety of
visual cognition issues in the fields of digital interfaces and in
product usability situations. All these are focussed on finding out
performance of particular subjects for particular applications and if it
works the concept is incorporated into the particular design, and it is
a great design since it works. However this may not explain why it works.

So, what is your hypothesis or the meta-mission in your research? Do you
want to find general laws and guidelines or are you asking particular
questions? I am reading (a new book which I recieved a few days ago from
the author, thank you) "Mind the Gap: On knowing and not knowing in
Design" by Wolfgang Jonas and Jan Meyer-Veden, Hochschule fur Kunste
Bremen, Bremen 2004. Much the same issues of what is possible or not
possible is explored in the application of research and knowledge and in
the pursuit of what is knowable in design. I quote Wolfgang Jonas in his
appendix: Expose for the "Basic Paradox".. Quote .... The sciences
construct the universal, the global, the de-contextualised, and the
eternal. Design creates the exemplary, the local, the contextual, and
the temporal. UnQuote.

So the question that comes to my mind is is your research "science" or
"design" driven? What do you hope to establish, what are the boundaries
of your research question, the answer to your question seems to me that
it is do-able, within limits. Where issues get enmessed across many
fields of knowledge you will be required to create filters that are
appropriate to handle the varied concepts (and test if they do work),
for instance visual perception could be determined by many conditions,
physical, medical-biological, cultural, linguistic, prior knowledge etc,
each of which is covered by a whole different field of study such as
physics, medicine, sociology or anthropology, linguistics, aesthetics,
philosophy etc.....so approprite filters must take each of these fields
into account, if isolation of a particular effects is to be made
possible at all, that too within limits, but limits can be pushed by
innovation and invention, creative experiment design, which you will
follow through on based on your conviction and faith developed by your
research so far. Do let us know what you find and I am sure that it will
help all of us understand this very complex phenomenon a little better.

With warm regards

M P Ranjan
from my office at NID
8 June 2004 at 9.35 pm IST

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. M P Ranjan
Faculty of Design
Head, NID Centre for Bamboo Initiatives
Project Head, Bamboo & Cane Development Institute, Agartala
Faculty Member on the NID Governing Council
National Institute of Design
Paldi
Ahmedabad 380007
INDIA
  
Email: <[log in to unmask]>
Fax: 91+79+26605242
Home: 91+79+26610054 (or) 91+79+26639692 ext 4095
Work: 91+79+26639692 ext 1090
-------------------------------------------------------------------




BUCHLER Daniela M wrote:
>
> Dear Ranjan,

SNIP SNIP

> > So where does the basic level (purely biological?) end and the
> cultural
> > and tutored levels (semantic and semiotic culturally mediated?) begin?
> >
> Wouldn't the fact that Cheryl is considering the "aesthetic" basic level
> imply that it is no longer purely biological but has already suffered
> what Chuck suggested to be an emotional response (i.e. interpretation)
> to the basic level stimulus?
>
> The reason I ask is that I am currently trying to use visual perception
> methods to test for degrees of visibly perceptible shape
> differentiation. I am working on the premises that it is possible to
> isolate and consider objectively the basic level visualization, prior to
> identification, recognition, interpretation - all of which are, as you
> rightly said, culture and background bound.
>
> Do you believe such isolation (in a controlled experiment and
> environment) is possible?
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Daniela
>
> :: Daniela Büchler ::
> PhD candidate
> Faculty of Arts, Media & Design
> Staffordshire University
> Stoke on Trent
> UK

SNIP SNIP