Bibliography of James Jerome (J. J.) Gibson


Here you will find an incomplete bibliography of James J. Gibson with over 70 references. Though not exhaustive it captures probably all of his important work. The references are ordered by the date of publication. Some of the articles appear multiple times, since they were reprinted in various forms.

A complete bibliography of 129 references (no abstracts) can be found in:

"Reasons for realism: selected essays of James J. Gibson"
(ed. by Edward Reed and Rebecca Jones)
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1982. (pp.431-437) ISBN 0-89859-207-0


Gibson, J. J. (1998). “Visually controlled locomotion and visual orientation in animals.” Ecological Psychology 10(3-4): 161-176.
(This reprinted article originally appeared in The British Journal of Psychology, 1958, Vol. 49, 182-194. The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 195909697-001.) Since the controlling stimulation for locomotor behavior in animals is mainly optical, a general theory of locomotor behavior must involve certain assumptions about object perception and "visual kinaesthesis." Evidence for these assumptions is cited and 8 formal postulates generated. From this theory it is inferred that animals are visually oriented to the surfaces of their environment not merely to light as such. Thus it is possible to explain why animals seem to have space perception. Finally, the implications of this theory for maze-learning are pointed out. ((c) 1999 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1994). “The visual perception of objective motion and subjective movement.” Psychological Review 101(2): 318-323.
(This reprinted article originally appeared in Psychological Review, 1954, Vol 61, 304-314. The following abstract of the original article appeared in PA, Vol 29:5103.) The question of movement involves at least 3 closely related questions: How do we see the motion of an object? How do we see the stability of the environment? How do we perceive ourselves as moving in a stable environment? The author draws together the experimental evidence on the 3 questions and draws out its implications, including a hypothesis for research. The article concludes with a discussion of the requirements for a psychophysics of kinetic impressions. 19 references. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1994). On theories for visual space perception: A reply to Johansson. Perceiving events and objects. Resources for ecological psychology. G. B. Jansson, Sten. NJ, USA, Hillsdale: 179-184.
This chapter is a reply to G. Johansson's letter (see PA, Vol 82:08222; 94-266025-005) concerning J. Gibson's recent book "The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems," and J. Gibson's construct of "ecological optics." ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J., M. A. Hagen, et al. (1992). Sensory processes and perception. A century of psychology as a science. S. Koch and D. Leary. Washington, DC, USA, American Psychological Association: 224-281.
(from the book) [book section covering several chapters] "Conclusions from a Century of Research on Sense Perception" / James J. Gibson / [Examines research on sensation and perception over the past century.] "James J. Gibson's Ecological Approach to Visual Perception" / Margaret A. Hagen / [Discusses James J. Gibson's ecological approach to conducting research on visual perception.] "Perception: A One-Hundred-Year Perspective" / Ralph Norman Haber / [Examines research on perception over the past century.] ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and B. Bridgeman (1987). “The visual perception of surface texture in photographs.” Psychological Research 49(1): 1-5.
49 students viewed photographs of rectangular samples of surface textures (e.g., sand, fur, rock) to examine the role of surface texture in ecological optics. Ss responded to questions about the identity, physical properties, and viewing conditions of each texture. Correct identifications were usually made, and Ss were able to identify at least physical state, planarity, and pigmentation. Diffuseness vs directionality of incident light could also be distinguished. The direction of incident light could be determined for a few rough textures. A polarization effect occurred in which light was reported as incident from either the correct side or its 180 opposite. Ss correctly detected the orientation of textures photographed in the frontal plane, but few slanted textures were accurately perceived. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1987). “The perception of visual surfaces.” American Journal of Psychology 100(3-4,): 646-664.
Reprints in its original form J. J. Gibson's 1950 article outlining his influential theory of perception, which centered on the idea that humans perceive objects against backgrounds in the real world by perceiving invariant relationships among the features of the figure and ground. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, Houghton Mifflin.

Gibson, J. J. (1977). “On the analysis of change in the optic array.” Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 18(3): 161-163.
Attempts to explain how the optic array at a point of observation carries information about the environment. It is hypothesized that an event is specified by a local change in the ambient array, while locomotion is specified by a global change of the ambient array. The surface layout of the environment is specified by invariants of structure. In some respects the layout is specified by the structure of an unchanging array, but it is specified in more respects by the invariants that underlie a changing array. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1973). “Direct visual perception: A reply to Gyr.” Psychological Bulletin 79(6): 396-397.
Notes that in J. Gyr's (see PA. Vol. 48:4093) criticism of J. J. Gibson's theory of perception, Gyr did not take into account the basic issue of the availability of stimulus information nor consider the radically new conception of proprioception and self-awareness that is an essential part of the theory. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1973). Die Wahrnehmung der visuellen Welt. Weinheim, Beltz.

Gibson, J. J. (1973). Die Sinne und der Prozess der Wahrnehmung. Bern, Hans Huber.

Gibson, J. J. (1971). “The legacies of Koffka's principles.” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 7(1): 3-9.
Among the founding fathers of Gestalt psychology, Koffka is the only one to have written a book of principles. But the laws of vision that he proposed, apart from the facts that he established, have not been verified over the years; e.g., the phenomenon of figure-on-ground is not universal. The concept of structure remains ambiguous. And yet his book, more than any other of its time, set the psychology of perception on its present course. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1971). “The information available in pictures.” Viewpoints 47(4): 73-95.
Discusses 2 conflicting theories of what a picture is. The point-projection theory of pictorial information assumes that it consists of a collection of light rays coming to a point, each corresponding to a spot of color on the picture surface. The symbol theory assumes that a picture consists of a set of symbols and is comparable to a written test. The background of both positions and how both deal with depth perception are traced. Both theories are rejected in favor of a new theory which suggests that "the optic array from a picture and the optic array from a world can provide the same information without providing the same information." (21 ref.) ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1971). “The legacies of Koffka's principles.” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 7(1): 3-9.
Among the founding fathers of Gestalt psychology, Koffka is the only one to have written a book of principles. But the laws of vision that he proposed, apart from the facts that he established, have not been verified over the years; e.g., the phenomenon of figure-on-ground is not universal. The concept of structure remains ambiguous. And yet his book, more than any other of its time, set the psychology of perception on its present course. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1970). “On theories for visual space perception: A reply to Johansson.” Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 11(2): 75-79.
Responds to G. Johansson's (see PA, Vol. 45:Issue 4) criticism that J. J. Gibson's "theory of stimulus information goes to an extreme and does not recognize the contribution of the organism to perception." It is argued that it is impossible to weigh the subjectivity of perception, and that Gibson's theory of available stimulus information outside the eyes of an O and explored by him avoids both nativism and empiricism. It is further suggested that Johansson, in calling Gibson's theory a "locomotor theory of space perception," fails to understand that Gibson's theory "goes hand in hand with a theory of proprioception" and that "a perceiver picks up information about the layout of the environment directly, and does so the more readily when the object moves or when he himself moves." ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J., G. A. Kaplan, et al. (1969). “The change from visible to invisible: A study of optical transitions.” Perception & Psychophysics 5(2): 113-116.
Argued that the problem of the phenomenal persistence of objects in experience, often called "object permanence," is actually a problem of the discriminating of persisting from nonpersisting things. A distinction is made between objects that go out of sight and objects that go out of existence, and it is shown that optical information exists to distinguish these 2 cases. Evidence is provided from a series of motion picture displays to suggest that Os do in fact distinguish them. The various optical transitions are shown to be reversing in the 1st case, but nonreversing in the 2nd. In particular, the transition that specifies the occlusion of 1 surface by another is analyzed, together with the inverse of this transition. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1968). “What Gives Rise to the Perception of Motion?” Psychological Review 75(4): 335-346.
REJECTS THE ASSUMPTION THAT DISPLACEMENT OF THE RETINAL IMAGE OVER THE RETINA IS THE BASIS FOR ALL PERCEPTION OF MOTION AS IT IS BASED ON A MISCONCEPTION ABOUT THE WAY EYES WORK. ANOTHER THEORY OF THE INFORMATION FOR PERCEIVING MOTION IS PROPOSED IN TERMS OF THE AMBIENT ARRAY OF LIGHT. THE REGISTERING OF SUBJECTIVE BODILY MOVEMENTS BY VISION IS CONTRASTED WITH THE DETECTING OF OBJECTIVE ENVIRONMENTAL MOTIONS. A NUMBER OF CENTURY-OLD PUZZLES ARE RESOLVED BY THIS APPROACH AND A SET OF NOVEL EXPERIMENTS IS SUGGESTED. (20 REF.) ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1967). “On the Proper Meaning of the Term "Stimulus.".” Psychological Review 74(6): 533-534.
IN REPLY TO HOCUTT (SEE 42:1), IT IS NOTED THAT PSYCHOLOGISTS CAN INDEED AVOID CIRCULAR REASONING IN THE WAY HE RECOMMENDS, BUT ONLY AT THE COST OF REDUCING PSYCHOLOGY TO A TRIVIAL SCIENCE. THE REAL CIRCULARITY TO BE FACED LIES IN THE PREVALENT CUSTOM OF CALLING ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTS AND EVENTS STIMULI. SINCE PSYCHOLOGISTS ARE FORCED TO SPEAK OF OBJECTS AND EVENTS IN SOME TERMINOLOGY, THEY ARE FACED WITH A DILEMMA. AN ALTERNATIVE IS SUGGESTED. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1966). “The problem of temporal order in stimulation and perception.” Journal of Psychology 62(2): 141-149.
Following Lashley, an alternative is suggested for the concept of memory as a storage and retrieval of engrams. Learning does not necessarily depend on remembering. Perceiving is not separated from remembering except by the subjective feelings of present and past, and even these are not clearly separable. The essential feature of learning is the resonating of the nervous system to the invariant properties of the stimulus flux over objective time. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston, Houghton Mifflin.

Gibson, J. J. (1963). “The useful dimensions of sensitivity.” American Psychologist 18(1): 1-15.
"The variables of sensory discrimination are radically different from the variables of perceptual discrimination . . . . Perception involves meaning; sensation does not." The "useful dimensions of sensitivity are those that specify the environment and the observer's relation to the environment . . . . The sense organs are all capable of motor adjustment." There are 2 kinds of organismic action, exploratory and performatory, and 2 kinds of feedback. Every sense is a pattern sense "capable of delivering a sequence or stream of neural inputs or changes in the simultaneous pattern. Every sense is therefore a transformation sense as well as a pattern sense . . . . The crux of the theory . . . is the existence of certain types of permanence and underlying charge. These invariants are in the stimuli at least potentially." ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and A. D. Pick (1963). “Perception of another person's looking behavior.” American Journal of Psychology 76(3): 386-394.
Looking can be treated as a source of stimulation as well as a type of response. Studies of perception of the act of looking have been rare or nonexistent. In this exploratory experiment, a student (female) was employed and trained as a source of controlled social stimulation. On request, she adopted 1 of 7 eye-postures in 1 of 3 head-postures. The method of constant stimuli was used. O's task was to judge whether or not he was being looked at. Results suggested we have good discrimination for line of gaze of another person, at least as to whether or not we are being looked at. Results were "consistent with the hypothesis of a relational stimulus-variable for the perception of gaze." The study showed the possibility of using a psychological method for the study of a seemingly complex stimulus-variable. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and F. A. Backlund (1963). “An after-effect in haptic space perception.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 15(3): 145-154.
After-effects in haptic perception have little studied. But they seem to be prominent, and easy to elicit. An after-effect of the perception of the vergence of 2 surfaces is described, and is shown to be independent of the slant of the surfaces. It is not "figural." Spatial perception with the hands, as well as with the eyes, is apparently based on a fluid and adaptable receptive system. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and H. Flock (1962). “The apparent distance of mountains.” American Journal of Psychology 75(3): 501-503.
The usual explanation of the illusion is the clearness of the air (i.e., absence of aerial perspective). The authors suggest another possible explanation. In the neighborhood of a mountain, distant earth shapes may be relatively large and thus reverse the normal optical gradient. Illusory perception depends on a combination of circumstances which holds for the particular situation and on the degree to which attention has been trained to register reliable information. The popular idea that clearness of mountain air explains misperception of distance is too simple. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, E. P., J. J. Gibson, et al. (1962). “A developmental study of the discrimination of letter-like forms.” Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology 55(6): 897-906.
The discrimination of letter-like forms from forms constructed by performing certain transformations upon the standards was studied in children 4 to 8 yr. old. At all ages perspective transformations caused most errors, and topological transformations the least, with rotation or reversal, and line to curve transformation in between. All classes or errors decreased with age, but at different rates. The results are explained in terms of transfer from principles used in identifying letters, with little learning of the features of graphemes which are not critical for distinguishing them. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1962). “Observations on active touch.” Psychological Review 69(6): 477-490.
"A series of observations, both introspective and behavioral, confirms the distinction between touching and being touched. The former is a channel for a great variety of information about the environment, but whether it should be considered one or several senses is a matter of definition. The simple formula that it consists of passive touch plus kinesthesis is insufficient. The hypothesis of two components of stimulation, one exterospecific and one propriospecific, is more promising." ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1960). “The information contained in light.” Acta Psychologica, Amsterdam 17: 23-30.
In its projective function, light contains more information than eyes will pick up in a lifetime of exploration. The information in optical geometry includes presence or absence of texture, pattern or form of a texture, texture with a closed contour, shape and size of contour as such, abstract form, density of texture as such, transformation, and invariant properties. Binocular disparity, color constancy, shadows, or distance estimation have not been discussed. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1960). “The concept of the stimulus in psychology.” American Psychologist 15: 694-703.
"The aim of this paper is to find out what psychologists mean by the term stimulus, with the hope of deciding what they ought to mean by it. After a short look at the history of the term, I will try to uncover the sources of confusion in modern usage." Psychologists "have inherited a mixed batch of ideas about the stimulus." Interlocking issues are separated into 8 areas of disagreement which are successively discussed. Hypotheses are suggested regarding molar stimuli, potential stimuli, effective stimuli, and related problems. "A systematic study of the specifying power of stimuli will put the problem of meaning in perception on a new footing." The "stimulus is the prime independent variable of a psychological experiment." From Psyc Abstracts 36:02:2BC94G. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Bergman, R. and J. J. Gibson (1959). “The negative after-effect of the perception of a surface slanted in the third dimension.” American Journal of Psychology 72: 364-374.
The phenomena of "figural after-effects" observed by Koehler and Wallach are similar to those designated "negative after-effects" by Gibson. Experiments are here reported yielding results which indicate that the phenomena of negative aftereffect can better be explained as the result of "a psychophysical principle called adaptation or normalization" than in terms of cortical processes. "We conclude that negative after-effects in vision cannot be subsumed under figural after-effects." ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, E. J., J. J. Gibson, et al. (1959). “Motion parallax as a determinant of perceived depth.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 58: 40-51.
"After verbal suggestion, information, or training concerning separation in depth, a correlation was present between the degree of velocity-difference and the degree of separation judged. It was raised by information and corrected training. But the reports indicated that the Os generally saw motions rather than depths, and that the appearance of depth was not induced by information or training . . . . This result does not support the theory of 'unconscious inference' or point to any process for the conversion of bidimensional impressions into perceptions." 15 refs. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1958). “Visually controlled locomotion and visual orientation in animals.” British Journal of Psychology 49: 182-194.
Since the controlling stimulation for locomotor behavior in animals is mainly optical, a general theory of locomotor behavior must involve certain assumptions about object perception and "visual kinaesthesis." Evidence for these assumptions is cited and 8 formal postulates generated. From this theory it is inferred that animals are visually oriented to the surfaces of their environment not merely to light as such. Thus it is possible to explain why animals seem to have space perception. Finally the implications of this theory for maze-learning are pointed out. 24 references. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and E. J. Gibson (1957). “Continuous perspective transformations and the perception of rigid motion.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 54: 129-138.
"Continuous perspective transformations of varying length were presented in 2-sec. cycles to each O on the visibly flat surface of a translucent screen. Judgments of the amount of change of slant of the apparently rigid object were in good correspondence with the length of the transformation sequence, without depending on the kind of pattern which carried the transformation. The patterns differed with respect to regularity vs. irregularity and form vs. texture. Regularity may have had a small effect on the variability of judgments but texturedness did not." 16 references. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J., O. W. Smith, et al. (1957). “The relative accuracy of visual perception of motion during fixation and pursuit.” American Journal of Psychology 70: 64-68.
"The accuracy with which the speed of two moving surfaces . . . could be matched was determined for two modes of observation: with fixation of the eyes and with pursuit by the eyes. Twenty-four Os made 20 judgments each, 5 per mode when the standard was on the right and 5 when on the left. The differences in errors between modes were not statistically significant. A space error was significant at the 5% level." ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1957). “Technical and scientific communication: A reply to Calvert.” American Journal of Psychology 70: 129-131.
Calvert's "blunt advice" to psychologists to adopt a more adequate terminology if they wish to contribute to aviation (see 31: 9013) reflects a failure in scientific and technical communication among investigators working on the same problem from different points of view. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1957). “Optimal motions and transformations as stimuli for visual perception.” Psychological Review 64: 288-295.
A projection in 2 dimensions of a physical motion in 3 dimensions is an optical motion. The kinds and variables of optical motion mentioned are continuous perspective transformations, these being defined as patterns in one plane projected onto another plane and analyzed into 6 parameters--3 of translation and 3 of rotation. An apparatus for producing continuous perspective transformations in the optic array is described for its possibilities of generating a psychophysics of motion perception. Possible kinds of optical motion that might serve as stimuli for perception are: internal depth of transparent objects and collections of objects, nonperspective transformations in the optic array, and disjunctive or separate optical motions. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1956). “The non-projective aspects of the Rorschach experiment: IV. The Rorschach blots considered as pictures.” Journal of Social Psychology 44: 203-206.
"In order to make progress with the Rorschach experiment, an explicit and testable theory of visual perception is necessary . . . a special theory of pictorial perception is what we need." Further, "the vague notion that all perception consists of the structuring of unstructured stimulation is in danger of becoming a sterile formula, if it is not actually misleading." ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and E. J. Gibson (1956). “Perceptual learning: differentiation or enrichment?” Americana 2: 83-94.
Translated into Japanese from Psychol. Rev., 1955, 62, 32-41 (see 29: 8374) ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and E. J. Gibson (1955). “Perceptual Learning: Differentiation or Enrichment?” Psychological Review 62: 32-41.
The authors entertain the hypothesis that the flux of stimulation at receptors yields all of the information anyone needs about the environment. In the theory, perception gets richer in differential responses, not in images. It is progressively in greater correspondance with stimulation, not in less. Previous literature as well as an illustrative experiment are brought to bear upon the notion. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J., J. Purdy, et al. (1955). “A method of controlling stimulation for the study of space perception: the optical tunnel.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 50: 1-14.
"A method is described for inducing and controlling a perception of surface and space. Conclusions are: (a) There is evidence that surface quality depends on the density of transitions in the optical stimulus. When the transitions are absent, surface quality disappears. (b) There is evidence that the gradient of texture density in isolation need not always determine the qualities of slant and recession. It is ambiguous, but only with respect to the members of a family of surfaces. (c) There is evidence that the gradients of textural disparity and motion can determine the qualities of slant and recession. Presumably when the gradients are concomitant, ambiguity is removed." ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1955). “Ordinal stimulation and the possibility of a global psychophysics.” Acta Psychologica 11: 178-179.

Gibson, J. J. and E. J. Gibson (1955). “What is learned in perceptual learning? A reply to Professor Postman.” Psychological Review 62: 447-450.
This is a reply to Professor Postman's critique (see 30: 5713) of the Gibsons' theory. The main point of disagreement concerns the authors' belief that Postman does not avoid the problems inherent in the associationistic position by ridding it of phenomenal experience and relating it to S-R connections. It is held that Postman's position leaves him with the problem of whether perceptual learning is a change in the attachment of responses to stimuli or an increase in the specificity of responses to stimuli. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J., P. Olum, et al. (1955). “Parallax and perspective during aircraft landings.” American Journal of Psychology 68: 372-385.
The concept of "motion perspective" is proposed as a more adequate designation of the parallax phenomena involved in locomotion relative to a surface than the conventional notion of motion parallax. A mathematical analysis of the concept is presented. Applications of the resulting formula for the perception of a stable tridimensional world and for locomotion therein are made. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Beck, J. and J. J. Gibson (1955). “The relation of apparent shape to apparent slant in the perception of objects.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 50: 125-133.
" . . . a reduced retinal shape without stimulation for the slant of the surface can induce a whole family of apparent shapes and does not necessarily determine the perpendicular cross-sectional member of the family . . . an illusory slant can induce an illusory shape. The phenomenal slant of such an object will tend to be that of the textured background surface, whatever its physical slant may be." The results were discussed in terms of a linkage between shape and slant within a family of shape-slants. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1955). “The optical expansion-pattern in aerial locomotion.” American Journal of Psychology 68: 480-484.
Applications of the concept of motion perspective lead to a number of hypotheses or rules for the control of locomotion in aircraft. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1954). “The visual perception of objective motion and subjective movement.” Psychological Review 61: 304-314.
The question of movement involves at least three closely related questions: How do we see the motion of an object? How do we see the stability of the environment? How do we perceive ourselves as moving in a stable environment? The author draws together the experimental evidence on the three questions and draws out its implications, including an hypothesis for research. The article concludes with a discussion of the requirements for a psychophysics of kinetic impressions. 19 references. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and W. Carel (1952). “Does motion perspective independently produce the impression of a receding surface?” Journal of Experimental Psychology 44: 16-18.
A special device was constructed to determine whether "an 'elastic deformation' of the retinal image will overcome an even distribution of elements to produce the impression of a receding surface." Subjects in a darkened room observed an array of lights in a frontal plane on a revolving disk, the bottom sector of which alone was visible at a given time, and reported whether the lights were motionless or in a plane receding upward when they were moved. The subjects did not report experiencing slant, recession, or increasing distance. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and D. Waddell (1952). “Homogeneous retinal stimulation and visual perception.” American Journal of Psychology 65: 263-270.
Homogeneous unfocussable images were presented to Ss by attaching translucent hemispheres to each of their eyes. Free description and answers to questions were used to determine the impressions which each S had. "The best conclusion is probably that a homogeneous field of color is indeterminate with respect to depth. The impressions that do occur are indefinite, unspecific, and ambiguous." ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1952). “The visual field and the visual world: a reply to Professor Boring.” Psychological Review 59: 149-151.
Boring's suggestion (see 27: 2451) that the visual field be interpreted as perception with reduced cues is rebutted. The visual field does not depend upon conditions of stimulation so much as upon attitude. Size constancy experiments with reduced cues to distance permit the 0 to see an object as either small or large depending on whether the 0 adopts a "perspective" attitude. Size constancy depends on an invariant of retinal stimulation consisting of a retinal area and a set of distance stimuli. An operational definition of the visual field must be stated in terms of response to stimulation and not in terms of stimulation alone. Boring's support of a distinction between sensation and perception is denied and it is proposed that an experimental source of perception start with an investigation of all the discriminable properties and qualities of visual experience. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and F. N. Dibble (1952). “Exploratory experiments on the stimulus conditions for the perception of a visual surface.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 43: 414-419.
4 exploratory experiments are reported bearing on the texture-hypothesis. As previously stated, "the stimulus for a visual surface is a fully differentiated, sharp, or textured retinal image." Reformulated here, "a surface occurs in perception when the gradients of luminous intensity in the image between small regions of different intensity are maximally steep." Adequacy of these definitions are related to the experimental results. Implications for further study on the stimulus conditions involved in the perception of both surface character and edge are discussed. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and J. Cornsweet (1952). “The perceived slant of visual surfaces--optical and geographical.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 44: 11-15.
An hypothesis is made and substantiated that two kinds of slant, optical and geographical, can be distinguished in a prescribed situation. The observer sits in a special room with his head turned 45 to the left and head fixed in a headrest at a certain angle. The subject faces a gray cardboard screen, through a window of which a textured surface is rotated around a vertical axis. The subject must judge when the surface reaches one of two normal positions. 6 for optical and 10 for geographical slant are values arrived at as absolute thresholds for the two kinds of slant in the particular situation. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1952). “The relation between visual and postural determinants of the phenomenal vertical.” Psychological Review 59: 370-375.
Accumulated evidence indicates that the judgment of apparent visual vertical is determined by the joint action of visual and postural stimulation. Neither is decisive for spatial perception. Reciprocal visual-proprioceptive stimulation results in a univocal impression of the vertical. Discrepant visual-proprioceptive stimulation results in equivocal, ambiguous perception. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1951). “What is form?” Psychological Review 58: 403-412.
A number of definitions of visual form are proposed as prerequisite to any approach to the problem of form perception. There is no such thing as form-in-general. Outline drawings are not appropriate stimulus-objects with which to have studied form-perception. Three separate levels of theory may be required: how we perceive the surfaces of objects, how we perceive representations, and how we apprehend symbols. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1950). The perception of the visual world. Boston, Houghton Mifflin.
The principal subject of this book is the visual perception of space. Chapters cover theories of perception, the visual field and visual world, formation of retinal images, a psychophysical theory of perception, stimulus variables for visual depth and distance, size and shape constancy, geometrical space and form, mean, learning, and spatial behavior. 121 references. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, E. J. and J. J. Gibson (1950). “The identifying response; a study of a neglected form of learning.” American Psychologist 5: 276.
This experiment tried to determine the relative effects of convulsive and sub-convulsive electric shocks administered to growing rats (27 days) on their ability to learn a maze at maturity. Group I was a control; Group II was given 25 shocks to create petit mal reactions; Group III received 25 shocks which resulted in an average of six tonic-clonic convulsions per animal and other petit mal reactions; Group IV was treated with a current intensity producing 25 tonic-clonic convulsions. Learning tests began at age of 194 days. A small decrement appeared, and this appeared to be permanent, the authors feeling as a direct result of the shocks. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1950). “The perception of visual surfaces.” American Journal of Psychology 63: 367-384.
The experiment is a further test and application of the writer's theory that visual space-perception is reducible to the perception of visual surfaces, and that distance, depth, and orientation, together with the constancy of objects, may all be derived from the properties of an array of surfaces. The fundamental "sensations" of space are assumed to be the impressions of surface and edge. Eight tentative phenomenal properties of the experience of a determinate surface are given. The specific experimental findings indicate the general conclusion that: as the gradient of density of the texture of a projected image is increased by the experimenter, the slant of the surface perceived increases correspondingly. The gradient of density and the property of optical slant are in psychophysical correspondence. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1949). “The relation between the perceptual constancy of objects and the perception of space.” American Psychologist 4: 221.
After strongly fixated view, about 10-20 sec., changes seem to occur in the permanent image in comparison to the original image. These are: lowered differentiation, greater order, simpler schematization, and idealization in conjunction with local adaptation. The cause is psychological, even though an unconscious and involuntary correction of perception also occurs. Some objects, in which this phenomenon is especially clear, are described. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1947). Motion picture testing and research. (AAF Aviat. Psychol. Program Res. Rep. No. 7.). Washington, DC, U.
The Psychological Test Film Unit was charged with the preparation and evaluation of motion picture tests for classification and training purposes, and with the conduct of research relative to use of films for these purposes. Final forms of 15 motion picture tests were produced, of which 12 were aptitude tests and 3 were proficiency tests. The aptitude tests covered abilities related to judgment of motion, locomotion, and distance, to orientation in space, to perception of slight movement, to multiple perception and sequential perception, to perceptual speed, and to comprehension. Tests for training purposes were concerned with navigation, bombing, and aircraft recognition. Relevant statistical data for tests developed are reported. Investigations of influence of seating and illumination on perception of films indicated that much latitude in these factors may be permitted without adverse influence on performance. Important validation work comparing different methods of aircraft recognition training was done. Claimed benefits from training in reading digits and counting spots with flash presentation were not sustained. Nor was the existence of two kinds of visual perception, a reputedly superior total type and an inferior disjunctive type, verified. Experiments comparing oral, printed, and motion picture methods of presenting certain training materials indicated the superiority of motion pictures over the traditional methods. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1946). Motion picture testing and research: preliminary draft. (AAF, Aviat. Psychol. Program, 1946; Publ. Bd., No. 18682.). Washington, D. C, U.
Research on the utilization of the motion picture medium for purposes of psychological testing and examining in the AAF and research on the problems of administering and scoring motion picture tests are presented. Additional teaching problems, such as the presentation of films to groups who view it from various angles and the techniques of teaching with the film medium, are treated in a general way that will be of interest to psychologists and educators. Some unusual problems, such as the representation of 3-dimensional space by pictures, are brought out. An appendix gives a model lecture to accompany a training film and a list of psychological test films. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1946). “Retinal stimulus variables for the perception of aerial space.” American Psychologist 1: 272.
The three sections of this volume deal with association theory, Gestalt theory, and a critique of Gestalt theory. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1941). “A critical review of the concept of set in contemporary experimental psychology.” Psychological Bulletin 38: 781-817.
The aim of this review is to make a systematic sample of the experimental writings related to the concept of set, to formulate problems, draw distinctions, and expose inconsistencies. The article covers the historical origins of the concept, set in the reaction time experiment, the relation between set and habit, set as a determinant of perception, set in relation to human problem-solving, the experimental investigation of the nature of tasks, and preparatory set in the human conditioning experiment. The conclusions are that no common meaning can be discerned for set. It has been found to correlate with 8 different things. A number of common assumptions are false as its dependence upon verbal instructions and its temporary character. Crucial ambiguities are found in the relationship of set to past experience and in the discussions of its voluntary nature. Bibliography of 125 titles. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1939). “The Aryan myth.” Journal of Educational Sociology 13: 164-171.
Anti-Semitism is not a specific attitude of hatred toward the Jew. Hostility is not created; it is due to pent-up anger which results from thwarting. The emotion is directed toward some object, such as the stereotype of the Jew, through propaganda. "Irrelevant aggression" results and the Jew becomes the object of hostility. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and L. E. Crooks (1938). “A theoretical field-analysis of automobile-driving.” American Journal of Psychology 51: 453-471.
An attempt to describe automobile-driving in terms of habits, attitudes and response-sequences produced little useful theory, for the overt reactions are simple and easily learned; the complexity of the problem lies in the perceptual field. The procedures of driving were therefore analyzed in terms such as Lewin uses. A car is thought of as a tool of locomotion; the problem of driving it is essentially learning to proceed to a destination without colliding with obstacles in the path. Facing the driver is a "field of safe travel"; his problem is to judge the size of this field and to progress down the middle of it. The objects in this field have valences, positive or negative, a green light being an example of the former, a red light of the latter. Deceleration or stopping is called for when there are obstacles which reduce the size of the field of safe travel. The factors which limit the size of this field are natural (ditches), inflexibility at high speeds, obstacles and their "clearance" lines, moving obstacles, potential obstacles (barriers to sight which may conceal obstacles), and legal taboos. Besides the field of driving, two other fields must be considered: the field of the other driver and the field of the car. The field of the car includes kinesthetic and tactual cues brought to the driver through the car itself, e.g., the "feeling" that the road is slippery. It is suggested that positive instruction in the principles that make certain driving practices dangerous for psychological reasons, instead of admonition or punishment, will lead to a reduction of accidents. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and O. H. Mowrer (1938). “Determinants of the perceived vertical and horizontal.” Psychological Review 45: 300-324.
An examination of the evidence supporting the role of the gravitational and equilibratory, or "g" factors, versus the visual cues, or "v" factors, in perceiving uprightness. The hypothesis is proposed that both factors act jointly, but that orientation to gravity is genetically primary and the more decisive in case of conflict. A large amount of evidence, clinical and experimental, is shown to support this, and also to show that visual orientation presupposes postural orientation. Perceptual space is a motor phenomenon. 10 specific conclusions are formulated concerning the relations of the main lines of the visual field and the direction of gravity. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1937). “Adaptation with negative after-effect.” Psychological Review 44: 222-244.
A generalized statement of the principle, which would apply to any sense modality, is that: If a sensory process which has an opposite is made to persist by a constant application of its appropriate stimulus conditions, the quality will diminish in the direction of becoming neutral, and therewith the quality evoked by any stimulus for the dimension in question will be shifted temporarily toward the opposite or complementary quality. The principle is applied to color and brightness contrast, temperature contrast, apparent reversal of curvature of lines, tactualkinesthetic shape of edges, linear direction or "tilt," visual movement (after-image of movement), tactual movement, taste, kinesthetic right and left, rotary movement, pleasantness-unpleasantness, areal contrast, etc. Certain implications for a physiological theory are suggested. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and M. Radner (1937). “Adaptation, after-effect and contrast in the perception of tilted lines.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 20: 453-467.
A refined and quantitative investigation of an earlier study which demonstrated that a line seen as tilted somewhat from the vertical or horizontal axis appears less tilted during the course of perception. Evidence from the present experiments reveals that the degree of adaptation toward the vertical and horizontal increases with longer and longer periods of inspection in a time curve similar to those of other processes of adaptation. The tilt-adaptation is never complete, however, but levels off before the quality of tilt is completely eliminated. In another phase of the present investigation it was shown that a negative after-effect on one reference-axis is accompanied by a corresponding indirect effect on the other axis, less in amount than the direct effect. The question as to whether simultaneous contrast between neighboring regions of the visual field can be shown to operate in the perception of tilt is postponed for subsequent treatment. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1937). “Adaptation, after-effect, and contrast in the perception of tilted lines. II. Simultaneous contrast and the areal restriction of the after-effect.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 20: 553-569.
The first paper of this series reported the fact that visual lines undergo what may be termed adaptation followed by a negative after-effect with respect to their direction or orientation in the frontal visual field. In many respects such adaptation behaves like sensory adaptation of the sort exhibited by color and temperature. In order to demonstrate more conclusively that linear direction is functionally akin to a sensory process like that of color, the two experiments of the present report were performed. The first demonstrated the occurrence of simultaneous contrast in this types of perception. Second, it was shown conclusively that the process of adaptation is a localized process within the visual field. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and J. M. Stephens (1936). “Discussion: a note on the conditioning of voluntary reactions; reply.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 19: 397-400.
It is Gibson's criticism that in Stephens' previously reported experiments the subjects may have been giving not conditioned reactions but only what would be called false reactions in the conventional choice-reaction procedure. The need for a specific type of control experiment is emphasized. In his reply, Stephens admits the need for a control such as Gibson suggests in order to demonstrate that voluntary reactions can be conditioned. However, the conditioning of voluntary reactions was a secondary matter and Gibson's criticism does not invalidate the main conclusions. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and G. Raffel (1936). “A technique for investigating retroactive and other inhibitory effects in immediate memory.” Journal of General Psychology 15: 107-116.
"The retention of geometrical nonsense forms, presented in a series, is an inverse function of their serial position when five forms are given, but does not vary with position when three forms are given." "Instead of the laws of primacy and recency, future investigations should bear on the complex of possible inhibitory influences which may be at work among the items of a series of impressions and on their position character and membership in a temporal group." The method is described in detail. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and D. Robinson (1935). “Orientation in visual perception; the recognition of familiar plane forms in differing orientations.” Psychological Monographs(210): 39-47.
The purpose of this study was "to illustrate the importance of orientation for form perception" and "to examine the part which may be assigned to learning in the relation between them." 33 shapes or contours were presented to each one of four groups of subjects in a different position: normal, turned 90 , 180 , or 270 . The 12 well-known geographical contours in the list were recognized best in their normal orientation as expected; the same was true of other familiar shapes that were usually seen in one orientation only. In the discussion the authors suggest "that learning plays a very important part in making a particular orientation of a shape the unique one in which the shape looks normal." ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. and L. Hudson (1935). “Bilateral transfer of the conditioned knee-jerk.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 18: 774-783.
The experiment was performed in order to follow up an earlier demonstration which showed that the conditioned withdrawal response of one hand to an electric shock transferred to the other hand, even though the second hand had not been given training. The subject was told to put his attention upon reacting as quickly as possible to the stimulus of a combined light and buzzer by pressing a grip key which he held in his hand on the side to be trained. 0.28 sec. after the beginning of the stimulus a blow was delivered to the patellar tendon. Thus the component events of a voluntary reaction, serving incidentally to facilitate the reflex, were employed as the conditioned "stimulus." In some subjects the knee-jerk was conditioned rapidly and with stability and the conditioning which occurred was equally effective in either leg, suggesting that what was learned was not an isolated response but something similar to a habit or skill. In an additional experiment it was found that the original conditioned stimulus-complex could be changed considerably without completely destroying its effectiveness. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, E. J. and J. J. Gibson (1934). “Retention and the interpolated task.” American Journal of Psychology 46: 603-610.
The authors distinguish between the operation (Aufgabe) and the material (perceptual data), and their problem is to determine the relative effects which each of these factors has upon retroactive inhibition. The primary task was the learning of paired consonants. The interpolated tasks were: (1) learning another list of paired consonants, (2) learning a list of paired digits, (3) cancelling a specified pair of consonants in pied type, and (4) cancelling a pair of digits. The "rest" condition consisted in looking at moving-picture "stills." The experiment was conducted as a group experiment, with about 26 S's in each group. The results show that "the interpolation of a task which is similar to the primary learning either in operation or in material results in poorer retention than does the interpolation of a task similar in neither . . . the two features . . . seem to be about equally important in the effect on retention." "That the features of a task are interdependent seems to be upheld by the probability that the sum of decrements due to operation and material does not equal the loss caused by similarity in both." ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1934). “Retroaction and the method of recognition.” Journal of General Psychology 10: 234-236.
Using a method previously described by Lund (Amer. J. Psychol., 1926, 37, 372-381), the author obtained results contradicting the claim of Heine in 1914 that retroaction does not occur when retention is tested by the method of recognition. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1934). “Vertical and horizontal orientation in visual perception.” Psychological Bulletin 31: 739-740.
This collected volume contains 7 articles on the problem of increasing the efficiency of the optic organ. The problem of optic fatigue is analyzed in the first two articles: "The influence of optic tension on the fundamental values of the optic apparatus" and "Optic fatigue in work on the stereodalnomer." The phenomenon of pulse fluctuation in the state of accommodative tension of the eye was investigated also. The last four articles consider the methods of optical investigation and the new devices for it. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1933). “Adaptation, after-effect and contrast in the perception of curved lines.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 16: 1-31.
A series of eight experiments in which the S's wore a pair of prisms shifting the visual field about 15 to the right, and--more important to the problem--the examination of the phenomenal bending of vertical straight lines into curves convex to the left, the horizontal components of the figures remaining undistorted. During an hour's observation "a curved line becomes phenomenally less curved than it was at the beginning of the period, and at the end of the period an objectively straight line will seem curved in the opposite direction. This fact holds whether the curvature is actually in the object, or is induced by the distorting effect of the prisms." Two theoretical considerations are offered and examined, preliminary to further experimentation: (1) The effects noted may be ascribed to conflict between experiences designated as visual and kinesthetic, following the discussions of Stratton, Wooster, Young, and Ewert on variations of the same general problem. (2) The effects may be described in terms of a function of the perceptual process "akin to sensory adaptation." The first argument is rejected in favor of the second, and further observational evidence is adduced in support from experiments 2 to 9 inclusive. The adaptation effect and the negative after-effect are of the same degree of magnitude, both simultaneous and successive contrast may be demonstrated and both these effects occur for kinesthetic as well as for visual perception. The essential condition for adaptation and after-effect seems not to be mere curvature of line, but departure from rectilinearity, since the phenomena appear as well on fixating an obtuse angle. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J., E. G. Jack, et al. (1932). “Bilateral transfer of the conditioned response in the human subject.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 15: 416-421.
Data were taken on 13 subjects for transfer of the conditioned response (removal of the hand from an uncharged electrode at the sound of a buzzer). In the training series the right hand only was conditioned. The results consist of responses made with the untrained left hand which had not been specifically conditioned. 62% of the trained subjects made definite withdrawal responses with the finger of the left hand when the buzzer was sounded alone. The inadequacy of the simple physiological schema frequently used in explaining conditioning is pointed out. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

Gibson, J. J. (1928). “The reproduction of visually perceived forms.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 12: 1-39.
In this investigation the author undertook to study the variations in the reproduction of geometrical patterns shown tachistoscopically to his observers, and to relate the difference to the observers' reports upon the nature of the perception. The types of changes are compared with those reported by Wulf in a previous investigation of the changes in memory images which occur with a lapse of time. (Psychol. Forsch., 1922, 1, 333 ff.) Two series of simple geometrical figures were used as the material, the one series consisting of 14 figures made up of straight lines, and the other, 14 figures made up of curved lines, including 4 figures that involved both straight-line and curved-line components. The figures were exposed to the subjects by a modified Ranschburg memory apparatus for approximately 11/2 seconds. No definite time limit was set for reproduction. Six observers participated in the experiment, making approximately 4,000 reproductions of the 28 figures. An analysis of the types of changes introduced by the observer in the reproductions of the figures showed trends in the direction of making them similar to objects frequently associated with the figures in previous perceptions. Also changes were often found to be conditioned by cues furnished from a verbal analysis made during the perception of the form. Closure, or perceptual filling, and analysis, or falling apart into separate units, were characteristics likewise. Curved lines are much more apt to be reproduced as straight lines than the reverse. In general, the nature of a change found in the reproduction depends upon the manner in which the figure was apprehended. ((c) 1997 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)