Groups and Social Interaction 2: Our Perception of Reality

Following our article on the Bilim ve Ütopya portal, “Tell me your friend’s strengths, and I’ll tell you yours” [1], we received many questions and contributions about group norms and Muzaffer Sherif. As I had already planned, I will try to touch on these topics in this installment of our series on perception and groups [1]. Among the books I drew on particularly for this article, I recommend “Bilişsel Psikoloji” (Cognitive Psychology), translated into Turkish by Bilge Publishing, to anyone interested in the subject.

The human mind is a highly complex system. Cognitive psychologists have researched these subjects for many years. Thanks to their experiments, we now have a considerable body of knowledge in this area [2]. Long before them, philosophers discussed the human mind, perception, and consciousness. Today’s philosophers continue to produce work on these topics. We will not delve deeply into the philosophical dimension, but “Beynin Gölgeleri” (Shadows of the Brain), a book on this subject by Saffet Murat Tura, one of our country’s prominent philosophers, successfully brings together its philosophical and scientific aspects. It is recommended for further reading to those interested [3].

Beyond philosophy’s role in guiding science, we also see the importance of interdisciplinary connections in psychiatry. Classical physics, based entirely on cause-and-effect relationships and observable, predictable rules; the laws of modern physics, through which we know that an object’s position and velocity in spacetime cannot both be determined simultaneously; research into artificial intelligence; and advances in our efforts to understand the human mind all help guide us in our field. With advances in physics and data science, and thanks to scientific research, we now know that, contrary to what we once thought, our brain is not a blank sheet of paper onto which inputs are recorded, but works more like a complex computer that actively processes information [3].

When we examine the complexity of the human mind, we encounter a rather surprising fact. This surprising “fact” is that science has demonstrated that even what we call perception—sounds, smells, touch, and similar experiences that we consider the purest forms of external reality—is consciously experienced only after information about the outside world has been processed and modified by our minds using various other kinds of information, from the very moment it reaches us. When someone responds to an event in any situation, they have already been exposed to many variables, beginning at the stage of perception [2]. After an event occurs, information follows a long path: the vibrations generated by the event reach the ear as waves, the membranes in the ear vibrate, and these vibrations travel along the relevant neural pathways to the area associated with perception at the back of the brain [5]. The appropriate perception takes place there, and this perception is then transmitted as information through various pathways to the front of the brain. Many centers play a role at all these stages along the brain’s perceptual pathways, perhaps with the thalamus—the intersection of these pathways—and related structures at their core [6]. Just before our conscious mind becomes aware of it, the sound is thus transformed into meaning, partly through prediction based on our previous experiences and expectations. Only after the mind understands this meaning as a whole within its context do we become fully aware of the experience we are having [2].

Of course, the process does not end here, and the subsequent processes involved in responding to perception become much more complex. But given the subject of this article, let us stop here. We can extend this neurocognitive process to many other senses—smell, vision, touch, spatial position, and so on—for which the centers that initially receive sensory input and the brain regions that first process it differ. If we also consider that, when we understand a perception as a contextual whole, these perceptions interact with one another to form a shared final understanding, we can begin to appreciate just how complex the mind’s workings are, even at the perceptual stage alone. Indeed, at the very beginning of this stage, even the greenness of a green apple is not entirely real. Objects in space do not actually have colors in the sense we understand them. We call a green, sour apple green because light striking the apple is refracted in that particular way at its surface, and because the eye’s initial receptor cells label that degree of refraction “green” [7]. In fact, our universe is colorless. To describe what we call a green, sour apple as a sour apple that refracts light at a particular frequency when illuminated, and consequently stimulates our retinal cone cells at a particular frequency, is to grasp the event “as it really is.” It is precisely in this act of understanding that even the initial “perception,” which we consider the first stage of the process, is influenced and altered by many factors. Among these many factors, we can examine the “frame of reference.” In his now-classic book on social psychology [8], Muzaffer Sherif offers an excellent example of a frame of reference:

“There is no direct, point-for-point relationship between a physical stimulus, experience, and the subsequent behavior it produces. Across a broad range, experience and behavior may reflect the way the organism functions in its current state. Take a piece of cardboard two feet long and one foot wide, covered in orange. Cover half of the cardboard with black paper, look steadily at the uncovered orange section for a few minutes, and then remove the black covering. For a while, the previously covered section will appear to be a different shade of orange from the other half. The same color may appear darker or lighter depending on whether it is surrounded by white or black, or on the image next to it. The same tone in a melody may be perceived differently in isolation and produce different effects when heard alongside other tones. Likewise, within its own range, a sound or a weight is judged not solely by its physical properties but in relation to the sounds and weights that form its background. In these examples, we respond differently to the same stimulus without consciously preparing ourselves to produce those responses. Conversely, if we can manage it at all, we must make a considerable effort to eliminate these different responses.” [8]

At this point, Sherif argues that experiences are always relational. Extending this a little, we can say that “context” is enormously important. The pleasure you get from a play, or what you feel during a film or a meeting, changes with context. The broader insight here, which we will also discuss in subsequent articles, is this: our perception itself—our perceiving red as red, cold as cold, and sour as sour—is related to “context” in the outside world. This far-reaching claim may be somewhat unsettling. At the same time, it is an insight we can reflect on and put to good use…

This field concerned with perception, which we will explore in greater depth in later articles, is called psychophysics. Let us conclude with an example from the sensory domain to reflect on.

“We encounter findings like these from the sensory domain in any general psychology textbook. Fill three containers with water: one hot, one lukewarm, and one cold. Immerse one hand in the hot water and the other in the cold water for a few minutes. Then immerse both hands in the lukewarm water. This water, at the same temperature for both hands, feels cool to the hand coming out of the hot water and warm to the hand coming out of the cold water. Relative to cold, a moderate temperature will be experienced as warm; relative to heat, the same temperature will be experienced as cool. Cold or hot stimulation causes shifts in the physiological zero, or point of indifference, within certain limits.” [8]

Let us end with this message: if you are searching for reality, pay a little more attention to your relationships and the existing context of your perception. It may be possible to get a little closer to the truth.

References

1. http://www.bilimveutopya.com.tr/index.php/makale/gruplar-ve-sosyal-etkilesim-i-bana-arkadasinin-guclu-yanlarini-soyle-sana-seninkini
2. MacLin, M. K., & Solso, R. L. (2007). Cognitive psychology. Pearson Education Limited.
3. Tura, S. M. (2016). Beynin Gölgeleri. Metis.
4. Türkçapar, M. H. (2019) Fark Et Düşün Hisset Yaşa. Epsilon
5. Aibara, R., Welsh, J. T., Puria, S., & Goode, R. L. (2001). Human middle-ear sound transfer function and cochlear input impedance. Hearing research, 152(1-2), 100-109.
6. Sherman, S. M., & Guillery, R. W. (2006). Exploring the thalamus and its role in cortical function. MIT press.
7. KAMBUROĞLU, E., DÜRÜK, K., & ÖZYOL, E. (2005). Görmenin Biyokimyası. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Ophthalmology, 14(4), 180-187.

---

This article was first published on the web portal of Bilim ve Ütopya magazine on March 8, 2019. As the portal has been taken offline, I am republishing the text here.