Abstract :
[en] Introduction: When processing complex information, individuals often forego reasoning rules and draw on general cognitive mechanisms instead. Accordingly, their responses may vary with stimuli perceptual properties, with mental models, or with metaphors grounding available information onto basic action patterns. We investigated how validation scores of conjunction and disjunction descriptions vary with stimuli perceptual properties. We hypothesised that high scores would obtain for conjunctions describing perceptually-dependent stimuli and for disjunctions describing perceptually-independent stimuli, where dependency status followed key Gestalt principles.
Methods: In each of three studies (N = 20) participants determined whether a coordination description matched a visual display. In Experiment 1, dependent and independent stimuli were moving simultaneously, respectively alternatively, illustrating the principle of common fate. In Experiment 2, dependent and independent stimuli were placed close, respectively far from each other, illustrating the principle of proximity. In Experiment 3, dependent and independent stimuli were of similar, respectively of dissimilar shapes, illustrating the principle of similarity.
Results: A comparison of e ect sizes con rmed our perceptual- dependency hypothesis. Moreover, the results showed that Gestalt grouping is strongest for stimuli varying in motion type, weaker for stimuli varying in spatial placement, and weakest for stimuli varying in shape.
Conclusions: Our studies assessed the independent e ects of motion type, proximity, and similarity, thereby contributing to the current debate concerning the representations evoked by naïve reasoning (i.e., model-, metaphor-, or Gestalt-based).
