Ir al menú de navegación principal Ir al contenido principal Ir al pie de página del sitio

Vol. 13 Núm. 1 (2023)
Enero-Junio

Artículos

Perceptual reversals and creativity: is it possible to develop divergent thinking by modulating bistable perception?

https://doi.org/10.19053/20278306.v13.n1.2023.16064

Publicado 2023-02-15

  • Guillermo Rodríguez-Martínez

Guillermo Rodríguez-Martínez
Universidad de Bogotá Jorge Tadeo Lozano, Bogotá, Colombia

Resumen

Este artículo tuvo por objeto examinar las relaciones que existen entre la percepción biestable y el pensamiento divergente, tomando como referencia que en los dos mecanismos hace emergencia una flexibilidad, sea perceptual o cognitiva. Se realizó una revisión literaria utilizando seis bases de datos. Las palabras clave utilizadas fueron: percepción biestable, reversibilidades perceptuales, perspicacia, cognición creativa, flexibilidad creativa, flexibilidad perceptual. Se encontraron 19 artículos sobre la relación entre la percepción biestable, la flexibilidad y la creatividad. Sobre la percepción biestable y sobre los mecanismos que se implican mientras emerge la flexibilidad cognitiva, se consideraron 44 estudios. Se incluyeron 2 revisiones sobre percepción biestable. También se cotejaron 6 artículos relativos a la creatividad como fenómeno cognitivo, más otros 3 sobre procesos perceptivos. Se concluye que los mecanismos moduladores de la percepción biestable tienen una posibilidad de ser incorporados para desarrollar la creatividad a partir de procesos de reconfiguración perceptual que involucren mecanismos de flexibilidad.

Palabras clave

percepción biestable;, pensamiento divergente;, reversibilidades perceptuales;, cognición creativa

PDF (English) XML (English)

Biografía del autor/a

Guillermo Rodríguez-Martínez

Profesional en Publicidad, Doctor en Psicología

Citas

  1. Ali, S., Moroso, T., & Breazeal, C. (2019). Can children learn creativity from a social robot? Proceedings of the 2019 on Creativity and Cognition, 359-368. https://doi.org/10.1145/3325480.3325499 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3325480.3325499
  2. Arecchi, F. T. (2007). Physics of cognition: Complexity and creativity. The European Physical Journal Special Topics, 146 (1), 205-216.
  3. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2007-00181-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2007-00181-0
  4. Arecchi, F. T. (2010). Dynamics of consciousness: Complexity and creativity. Journal of Psychophysiology, 24 (2), 141. https://doi.org/10.1027/0269-8803/a000026 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1027/0269-8803/a000026
  5. Baker, D. H., Karapanagiotidis, T., Coggan, D. D., Wailes-Newson, K., & Smallwood, J. (2015). Brain networks underlying bistable perception. NeuroImage, 119, 229-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.06.053 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.06.053
  6. Balcetis, E., & Dale, R. (2007). Conceptual set as top-down constraint on visual object identification. Perception, 36, 581-595. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5678 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1068/p5678
  7. Barrera, M., & Calderón, L. (2013). Notes for supporting an epistemological neuropsychology: contributions from three perspectives. International Journal of Psychological Research, 6 (2), 107 – 118., 6(2), 107-118. https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.692 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.692
  8. Bellemare-Pepin, A., Harel, Y., O’Byrne, J., Mageau, G., Dietrich, A., & Jerbi, K. (2022). Processing Visual Ambiguity in Fractal Patterns: Pareidolia as a Sign of Creativity. Available at SSRN 4073004. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4073004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4073004
  9. Bialystok, E., & Shapero, D. (2005). Ambiguous benefits: the effect of bilingualism on reversing ambiguous figures. Developmental Science, 8 (6), 595-604. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2005.00451.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2005.00451.x
  10. Biederman, I., & Ju, G. (1988). Surface versus edge-based determinants of visual recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 38-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(88)90024-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(88)90024-2
  11. Blake, A., & Palmisano, S. (2021). Divergent Thinking Influences the Perception of Ambiguous Visual Illusions. Perception, 50 (5). https://doi.org/10.1177/03010066211000192 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/03010066211000192
  12. Borisyuk, R., Chik, D., & Kazanovich, Y. (2009). Visual perception of ambiguous figures: synchronization based neural models. Biological Cybernetics, 100, 491-504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00422-009-0301-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00422-009-0301-1
  13. Brouwer, G. J., & van Ee, R. (2006). Endogenous influences on perceptual bistability depend on exogenous stimulus characteristics. Vision Research, 46, 3393-3402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2006.03.016
  14. Clément, G., & Demel, M. (2012). Perceptual reversal of bi-stable figures in microgravity and hypergravity during parabolic flight. Neuroscience Letters, 507, 143-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2011.12.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2011.12.006
  15. Diana, L., Frei, M., Chesham, A., de Jong, D., Chiffi, K., Nyffeler, T., Bassetti, C. L., Goebel, N., Eberhard-Moscicka, A. K., & Müri, R. M. (2021). A divergent approach to pareidolias—Exploring creativity in a novel way. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 15 (2), 313–323. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000293 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000293
  16. Doherty, M. J., & Mair, S. (2012). Creativity, ambiguous figures, and academic preference. Perception, 41 (10), 1262-1266. https://doi.org/10.1068/p7350 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1068/p7350
  17. Dow, G. T., & Mayer, R. E. (2004). Teaching students to solve insight problems: Evidence for domain specificity in creativity training. Creativity Research Journal, 16 (4), 389-398. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410409534550 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410409534550
  18. Feist, M., & Gentner, D. (2007). Spatial language influences memory for spatial scenes. Memory and Cognition, 35, 283-296. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193449 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193449
  19. Freyd, J., & Pantzer, T. (1995). Static patterns moving in the mind. In S. Smith, T. Ward, & R. Finke (Eds), The creative cognition approach, 181-204. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT press, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  20. Gale, A., & Findlay, J. (1983). Eye-movement patterns in viewing ambiguous figures. In R. Groner, C. Menz, D. Fisher, & R. Monty (Eds), Eye movements and psychological functions: international views, 145-168. Hillsdale NJ: LEA DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003165538-14
  21. García-Pérez, M. (1989). Visual inhomogeneity and eye movements in multistable perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 46, 397-400. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204995 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204995
  22. García-Pérez, M. (1992). Eye movements and perceptual multistability. In G.E. Stelmach, & P.A. Vroon (Eds), Advances in Psychology (88), 73-109. Amsterdam - London - New York - Tokyo: North-Holland. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)61743-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)61743-4
  23. Gijs, B., & van Ee, R. (2006). Endogenous influences on perceptual bistability depend on exogenous stimulus characteristics. Visual Research, 46, 3393-3402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2006.03.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2006.03.016
  24. Gilhooly, K. J., & Murphy, P. (2005). Differentiating insight from non-insight problems. Thinking & Reasoning, 11 (3), 279-302. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780442000187 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780442000187
  25. Goolkasian, P., & Woodberry, C. (2010). Priming effects with ambiguous figures. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 72, 168-178.
  26. https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.1.168 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.1.168
  27. Gori, S., Giora, E., & Pedersini, R. (2008). Perceptual multistability in figure-ground segregation using motion stimuli. Acta Psychologica, 129, 399-409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.09.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.09.004
  28. Grossmann, J. K., & Dobbins, A. C. (2006). Competition in bistable vision is attribute-specific. Vision Research, 46, 285-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2005.06.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2005.06.002
  29. Hsiao, J., Chen, Y., Spence, C., & Yeh, S. (2012). Assessing the effects of audiovisual semantic congruency on the perception of a biestable figure. Consciousness and Cognition, 21, 775-787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2012.02.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2012.02.001
  30. Intaité, M., Koivisto, M., Rukšėnas, O., & Revonsuo, A. (2010). Reversal negativity and bistable stimuli: attention, awareness, or something else? Brain and Cognition, 74, 24-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2010.06.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2010.06.002
  31. Intaité, M., Kovisto, M., & Castelo-Branco, M. (2014). Event-related potential responses to perceptual reversals are modulated by working memory load. Neuropsychologia, 56, 428-438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.02.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.02.016
  32. Intaité, M., Noreika, V., Šoliūnas, A., & Falter, C. M. (2013). Interaction of bottom-up and top-down processes in the perception of ambiguous figures. Vision Research, 89, 24-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2013.06.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2013.06.011
  33. Kogo, N., Hermans, L., Stuer, D., van Ee, R., & Wagemans, J. (2015). Temporal dynamics of different cases of bi-stable figure-ground perception. Vision Research, 106, 7-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2014.10.029 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2014.10.029
  34. Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2009). The Aha! moment: The cognitive neuroscience of insight. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18 (4), 210-216. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01638.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01638.x
  35. Kornmeier, J., & Bach, M. (2004). Early neural activity in Necker‐cube reversal: Evidence for low‐level processing of a gestalt phenomenon. Psychophysiology, 41 (1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-8986.2003.00126.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-8986.2003.00126.x
  36. Kornmeier, J., & Bach, M. (2005). The Necker cube - an ambiguous figure disambiguated in early visual processing. Vision Research, 45, 955-960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2004.10.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2004.10.006
  37. Kornmeier, J., & Bach, M. (2006). Bistable perception - along the processing chain from ambiguous visual imput to a stable percept. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 62, 345-349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2006.04.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2006.04.007
  38. Kornmeier, J., Hein, C. M., & Bach, M. (2009). Multistable perception: when bottom-up and top-down coincide. Brain and Cognition, 69, 138-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2008.06.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2008.06.005
  39. Laukkonen, R. E., & Tangen, J. M. (2017). Can observing a Necker cube make you more insightful? Consciousness and Cognition, 48, 198-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.11.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.11.011
  40. Leopold, D. A., & Logothetis, N. K. (1999). Multistable phenomena: changing views in perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7 (3), 254-264. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01332-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01332-7
  41. Liu, C.-H., Tzeng, O., Hung, D., Tseng, P., & Juan, C.-H. (2012). Investigation of bistable perception with the "silhouette spinner": Sit still, spin the dancer with your will. Vision Research, 60, 34-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2012.03.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2012.03.005
  42. Long, G., & Toppino, T. (1981). Multiple representations of the same reversible figure: implications for cognitive decisional interpretations. Perception, 10, 231-234. https://doi.org/10.1068/p100231 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1068/p100231
  43. Long, G., & Toppino, T. (2004). Enduring interest in perceptual ambiguity: alternating views of reversible figures. Psychological Bulletin, 130 (5), 748–768. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.748 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.748
  44. Mao, Y., Kanai, R., Ding, C., Bi, T., & Qiu, J. (2020). Temporal variability of brain networks predicts individual differences in bistable perception. Neuropsychologia, 107426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107426 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107426
  45. Marroquín-Ciendúa, F., Rodríguez-Martínez, G., & Rodríguez-Celis, H. G. (2020). Modulación de la percepción biestable: un estudio basado en estimulación multimodal y registros de actividad oculomotora. Tesis Psicológica, 15(1), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.37511/tesis.v15n1a4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.37511/tesis.v15n1a6
  46. McCrae, R. R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52 (6), 1258. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1258 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1258
  47. Meng, M., & Tong, F. (2004). Can attention selectively bias bistable perception? Differences between binocular rivalry and ambiguous figures. Journal of Vision (4), 539 - 551. https://doi.org/10.1167/4.7.2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1167/4.7.2
  48. O'Brien, C., Harris, M., & Higgs, S. (2013). Effects of alcohol on attentional mechanisms involved in figure reversals. Human Psychopharmacology: Clinical and Experimental, 28 (5), 484-494. https://doi.org/10.1002/hup.2337 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hup.2337
  49. Okazaki, M., Kaneko, Y., Yumoto, M., & Arima, K. (2008). Perceptual change in response to a bistable picture increases neuromagnetic beta-band activities. Neuroscience Research, 61, 319-328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2008.03.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2008.03.010
  50. Patel, L. N., & Holt, P. O. (2000). Modelling visual complexity using geometric primitives. Orlando: Proceedings, Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.24.2471&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  51. Patrick, J., & Ahmed, A. (2014). Facilitating representation change in insight problems through training. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40 (2), 532. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034304 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034304
  52. Pressnitzer, D., & Hupé, J.-M. (2006). Temporal dynamics of auditory and visual bistability reveal common principles of perceptual organization. Current Biology (16), 1351-1357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.05.054 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.05.054
  53. Qiu, J., Dongtao, W., Hong, L., Caiyun, Y., Ting, W., & Quinglin, Z. (2009). The vace-face illusion seen by the brain: An event-related brain potentials study. International Journal of Psychopshysiology, 74, 69-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2009.07.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2009.07.006
  54. Riquelme, H. (2002). Can people creative in imagery interpret ambiguous figures faster than people less creative in imagery? The Journal of Creative Behavior, 36 (2), 105-116. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2002.tb01059.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2002.tb01059.x
  55. Rock, I., Hall, S., & Davis, J. (1994). Why do ambiguous figures reverse? Acta Psychologica, 87, 33-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(94)90065-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(94)90065-5
  56. Rodríguez, G. (2016). La reconfiguración perceptual de imágenes aplicada al desarrollo del pensamiento divergente en el aula de clase. Revista Q, 11 (21), 61-81. https://doi.org/10.18566/revistaq.v11n21.a05 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18566/revistaq.v11n21.a05
  57. Rodríguez, G., & Castillo, H. (2018a). Tareas de búsqueda visual: modelos, bases neurológicas, utilidad y prospectiva. Universitas Psychologica, 17 (1). https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.upsy17-1.tbvm DOI: https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.upsy17-1.tbvm
  58. Rodríguez, G., & Castillo, H. (2018b). Bistable perception: neural bases and usefulness in psychological research. International Journal of Psychological Research, 11 (2), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.3375 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.3375
  59. Rodríguez-Martínez, G., Castillo-Parra, H., Rosa, P. J., & Marroquín-Ciendúa, F. (2021). Ocular fixations modulate audiovisual semantic congruency when standing in an upright position. Suma Psicológica, 28 (1), 43-51. https://doi.org/10.14349/sumapsi.2021.v28.n1.6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14349/sumapsi.2021.v28.n1.6
  60. Rodríguez-Martínez, G., Marroquín-Ciendúa, F., Rosa, P., & Castillo-Parra (2022). Perceptual reversals and time-response analyses within the scope of decoding a bistable image. Interdisciplinaria: Revista de Psicología y Ciencias Afines, 39 (1), 257-273. https://doi.org/10.16888/interd.2022.39.1.16 DOI: https://doi.org/10.16888/interd.2022.39.1.16
  61. Romo, M. (1986). Treinta y cinco años del pensamiento divergente: teoría de la creatividad de Guilford. Estudios de Psicología, 7 (27-28), 175-192. https://doi.org/10.1080/02109395.1986.10821474 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02109395.1986.10821474
  62. Runco, M. A., & Acar, S. (2012). Divergent thinking as an indicator of creative potential. Creativity Research Journal, 24 (1), 66-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.652929 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.652929
  63. Sandberg, K., Barnes, G. R., Bahrami, B., Kanai, R., Overgaard, M., & Rees, G. (2014). Distinct MEG correlates of conscious experience, perceptual reversals and stabilization during binocular rivalry. Neuroimage, 100, 161-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.06.023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.06.023
  64. Schauer, G., Kanai, R., & Brascamp, J. W. (2016). Parietal theta busrs TMS: Functional fractionation observed during bistable perception not evident in attention tasks. Consciousness and Cognition (40), 105-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.01.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.01.002
  65. Schooler, J. W., & Melcher, J. (1995). The ineffability of insight. In S.M. Smith, T.B. Ward, & R.A. Finke (Eds). The creative cognition approach, 97-133. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  66. Smith, E., Grabowecky, M., & Susuki, S. (2007). Auditory-visual crossmodal integration in perception of face gender. Current Biology, 17, 1680-1685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2007.08.043 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2007.08.043
  67. Sterzer, P., Kleinschmidt, A., & Rees, G. (2009). The neural bases of multistable perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13 (7), 310-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.04.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.04.006
  68. Taranu, M., & Loesche, F. (2017). Spectres of Ambiguity in Divergent Thinking and Perceptual Switching. Avant. The Journal of the Philosophical-Interdisciplinary Vanguard, 8, 121-133. htpps://doi.org/ 10.26913/80s02017.0111.0012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26913/80s02017.0111.0012
  69. Taranu, M., Wimmer, M. C., Ross, J., Farkas, D., van Ee, R., Winkler, I., & Denham, S. L. (2019). Children’s perception of visual and auditory ambiguity and its link to executive functions and creativity. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 184, 123-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2019.03.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2019.03.010
  70. Van Loon, A. M., Knapen, T., Scholte, H. S., St. John-Saaltink, E., Donner, T. H., & Lamme, V. A. (2013). GABA Shapes the Dynamics of Bistable Perception. Current Biology, 23, 823-827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.03.067 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.03.067
  71. Ward, T. B. (2007). Creative cognition as a window on creativity. Methods, 42 (1), 28-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymeth.2006.12.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymeth.2006.12.002
  72. Weilnhammer, V., Ludwig, K., Sterzer, P., & Hesselmann, G. (2014). Revisiting the Lissajous figure as a tool to study bistable perception. Vision Research, 98, 107-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2014.03.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2014.03.013
  73. Wiseman, R., Watt, C., Gilhooly, K., & Georgiou, G. (2011). Creativity and ease of ambiguous figural reversal. British Journal of Psychology, 102 (3), 615-622. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02031.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02031.x
  74. Wu, X., Gu, X., & Zhang, H. (2019). The facilitative effects of ambiguous figures on creative solution. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 53 (1), 44-51. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.161 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.161
  75. Yamamoto, S., & Yamamoto, M. (2006). Effects of the gravitational vertical on the visual perception of reversible figures. Neuroscience Research (55), 218-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2006.02.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2006.02.014

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Artículos similares

1 2 3 4 5 > >> 

También puede {advancedSearchLink} para este artículo.