Gibson’s Report

James Gibson hypothesizes in his article that “any transformation of the total retinal image, as distinguished from a part image within it, tends to yield an experience of a movement of the observer, and the kind of change experienced depends on the type of transformation”(Gibson 310).  In the investigation of the properties of moving objects and stationary objects by a moving eye or a stationery individual, the author takes the view that objects tend to appear stationary to a person who is in a stable position. However, once a person moves the eye to see an entire object, the images perceived by the eye will be transformed according to the degree and type of transformation. It is thus not possible for a person to understand a stationary object as stationary even when that person is in an immovable position.

The author adopts the procedure of qualitative analysis of secondary sources from a variety of writers on the subject of motion and eye movements. Independent variables are the motion of an object and stable environment. Dependent variables include the motion of a patterned surface, complex controllable movements, deformation of shadows and apparatus employed. Other dependent variables include stroboscopic motions and movement of the observer (Gibson 309)
The primary results of the study are that visual actions are sensory in nature, but the author qualifies this statement by postulating that motions are not acoustic.  The author further postulates that the stimulus perceived in motion is relational in nature and that impressions formed by kinetic motion are not “copies of their stimuli” (Gibson 311). The key conclusion from Gibson’s study is that “the various motions of objects in a stable environment and the different movements of ourselves in that environment can both be visually perceived” (Gibson 313).
What I like about the study is the manner in which the author uses different sources and scientific processes to arrive at the conclusions he makes in the article (Gibson 34). The author can use academic language to explain seemingly difficult concepts in a very clear manner. The reader is not at pains to understand the major propositions of his thesis because the article explains in detail and with examples some of the most difficult concepts.








Works Cited
Gibson, James J. "The visual perception of objective motion and subjective movement." Psychological Review 61.5 (1954): 304. Print.
Gibson, James J. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition. Psychology Press, 2014. Print.