A Psychophysical Approach to Test: “The Bignetti Model”

Abstract

The cognitive "Bignetti Model" (TBM) thoroughly discussed elsewhere, shares a strong analogy with "Learning Through Experience" (LTE) and Bayesian Learning Process (BLP). Here, TBM's theory is challenged by means of a psychophysical press/no-press decision task (DT). Participants must press a computer key in response to sweet food image (SWEET) or refrain from doing it with a salted food image (SALTED) (24 trials each, mixed at random in a 48-trial DT). Reaction times (RT) plotted as a function of trials decrease exponentially according to a well-known "intertrial priming" effect. When 1 SWEET is repeated 24 times per DT, RTs tend to a minimal value that corresponds to the fastest, instinctive RT the participant can exhibit when engaged in a traffic light-based task. Interestingly, the more we change SWEET images, the greater are the final RTs in a DT (this disturbance is not seen by changing SALTED images). It is proposed that the increase of motivational incentives along the task may foster the learning process. In the presence of SWEET distractors this process is impaired due to a short-term memory mismatch between increasing targets of similar semantics. These results are compatible both with the current literature and TBM.

“Dual State”, “Double-Perspective” and “Cartesian-Like Dualism” Are Three Forms of Dualisms Emerging in Mind Like in a Matrioska

“…A fifth example regards the data obtained through a series of cognitive "press/ no-press" psychophysical test (Bignetti et al, 2016;Aimi et al, 2018). In line with the third example reported above, we have demonstrated the reaction of young subjects to repetitive trials were shortening so much until they become compatible with automatic reactions; they became so short that CM could not even recognize the test's items.…”

May Conscious Mind Give a “Scientific Definition” of Consciousness?

“…So, the question is whether "to choose" implies a conditioned or conditional act; the theoretical and practical implications of this answer on human cognition are overwhelming. Therefore, the possibility that individual believe in FW might play a fundamental role in cognition, has been deeply investigated by the author and coworkers (Bignetti, 1994(Bignetti, , 2001(Bignetti, , 2003(Bignetti, , 2004(Bignetti, , 2010, 2017Bignetti et al, 2016;Aimi et al, 2018). At first, data demonstrated that brain is a probabilistic-deterministic machine (Koch, 1999;Bignetti, 2003); as an example, see: "Galton Board" in which the falling down balls randomly bounce either left or right, with the same probability.…”

New Insights into “The Bignetti Model” from Classic and Quantum Mechanics Perspectives

“…Unlike the numerous theories and models about the mechanism of human cognition till now present in the literature, TBM is really the unique one that reconverts FW-illusion into an essential ingredient on which cognitive processes underlie. To validate this hypothesis, recently, Bignetti et al [19][20] carried out press/no-press psychophysical experiments by using salted and sweet foods images (respectively "press" and "no-press" cues) that were projected onto a computer screen. Upon cue recognition, subjects had to decide whether to press or not, as fastest as possible.…”

“…Recently, Bignetti et al have carried out some experiments of classic psychophysics to test TBM; the data could be easily interpolated by rational curves derived from a mathematical model that is compatible with TBM. [19][20] The first psychophysical experiments are not enough to consider TBM's theory validated. A more appropriate analytical method (e.g.…”