模糊的解释力。以查尔斯-博内综合症为例,对幻觉的强先验假说的挑战

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Franz Roman Schmid , Moritz F. Kriegleder
{"title":"模糊的解释力。以查尔斯-博内综合症为例,对幻觉的强先验假说的挑战","authors":"Franz Roman Schmid ,&nbsp;Moritz F. Kriegleder","doi":"10.1016/j.concog.2023.103620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Predictive processing models are often ascribed a certain generality in conceptually unifying the relationships between perception, action, and cognition or the potential to posit a ‘grand unified theory’ of the mind. The limitations of this unification can be seen when these models are applied to specific cognitive phenomena or phenomenal consciousness. Our article discusses these shortcomings for predictive processing models of hallucinations by the example of the Charles-Bonnet-Syndrome. This case study shows that the current predictive processing account omits essential characteristics of stimulus-independent perception in general, which has critical phenomenological implications. We argue that the most popular predictive processing model of hallucinatory conditions – the strong prior hypothesis – fails to fully account for the characteristics of nonveridical perceptual experiences associated with Charles-Bonnet-Syndrome. To fill this explanatory gap, we propose that the strong prior hypothesis needs to include reality monitoring to apply to more than just veridical percepts.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51358,"journal":{"name":"Consciousness and Cognition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810023001575/pdfft?md5=810e45a7df6ff29afbaca49d8850b66f&pid=1-s2.0-S1053810023001575-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Explanatory power by vagueness. Challenges to the strong prior hypothesis on hallucinations exemplified by the Charles-Bonnet-Syndrome\",\"authors\":\"Franz Roman Schmid ,&nbsp;Moritz F. Kriegleder\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.concog.2023.103620\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Predictive processing models are often ascribed a certain generality in conceptually unifying the relationships between perception, action, and cognition or the potential to posit a ‘grand unified theory’ of the mind. The limitations of this unification can be seen when these models are applied to specific cognitive phenomena or phenomenal consciousness. Our article discusses these shortcomings for predictive processing models of hallucinations by the example of the Charles-Bonnet-Syndrome. This case study shows that the current predictive processing account omits essential characteristics of stimulus-independent perception in general, which has critical phenomenological implications. We argue that the most popular predictive processing model of hallucinatory conditions – the strong prior hypothesis – fails to fully account for the characteristics of nonveridical perceptual experiences associated with Charles-Bonnet-Syndrome. To fill this explanatory gap, we propose that the strong prior hypothesis needs to include reality monitoring to apply to more than just veridical percepts.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51358,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Consciousness and Cognition\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810023001575/pdfft?md5=810e45a7df6ff29afbaca49d8850b66f&pid=1-s2.0-S1053810023001575-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Consciousness and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810023001575\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Consciousness and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810023001575","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

预测处理模型通常被认为具有一定的普遍性,在概念上统一了感知、行动和认知之间的关系,或者有可能假设一个关于心灵的“大统一理论”。当这些模型应用于特定的认知现象或现象意识时,可以看出这种统一的局限性。本文以charles - bonnet综合征为例,讨论了幻觉预测处理模型的这些缺陷。这一案例研究表明,目前的预测处理解释通常忽略了刺激独立感知的基本特征,这具有重要的现象学意义。我们认为,最流行的幻觉条件预测处理模型-强先验假设-不能完全解释与charles - bonnet综合征相关的非真实知觉经验的特征。为了填补这一解释空白,我们提出强先验假设需要包括现实监测,以适用于不仅仅是真实的感知。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Explanatory power by vagueness. Challenges to the strong prior hypothesis on hallucinations exemplified by the Charles-Bonnet-Syndrome

Predictive processing models are often ascribed a certain generality in conceptually unifying the relationships between perception, action, and cognition or the potential to posit a ‘grand unified theory’ of the mind. The limitations of this unification can be seen when these models are applied to specific cognitive phenomena or phenomenal consciousness. Our article discusses these shortcomings for predictive processing models of hallucinations by the example of the Charles-Bonnet-Syndrome. This case study shows that the current predictive processing account omits essential characteristics of stimulus-independent perception in general, which has critical phenomenological implications. We argue that the most popular predictive processing model of hallucinatory conditions – the strong prior hypothesis – fails to fully account for the characteristics of nonveridical perceptual experiences associated with Charles-Bonnet-Syndrome. To fill this explanatory gap, we propose that the strong prior hypothesis needs to include reality monitoring to apply to more than just veridical percepts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Consciousness and Cognition
Consciousness and Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
123
期刊介绍: Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal provides a forum for a natural-science approach to the issues of consciousness, voluntary control, and self. The journal features empirical research (in the form of regular articles and short reports) and theoretical articles. Integrative theoretical and critical literature reviews, and tutorial reviews are also published. The journal aims to be both scientifically rigorous and open to novel contributions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信