Research Documentation and Results Analysis, Research Paper Example

Methodology

This research is based on an experimental process that does provide a window of distinction that defines how the mind responds to visual stimulation. The experimentation consists of two phases of correlative analysis and interpretation on the part of the participants. First part is the condition where the mind is introduced to the first image that the eyes could actually immediately relate to in the overall presentation of the given image for interpretation. The second part is the relative setting of correlation between the first and the second image put together in a face and how the emotional implication of the image is analyzed by the individuals as a whole. The collaborative implication of image distinction then becomes the new meaning of the visual aide that the participant is expected to decipher in accordance to how he or she relates to the picture randomly shown in the monitor.

Individuals who participated in this research were randomly picked and had not been given any particular clue as to what images they are to see in the screen. They were however instructed as to what they are supposed to do especially in relation to analyzing the pictures that are to be shown to them during the process. Responding to the said cue, the participants then analyzed the pictures based the given choices of definition along with the program given to them which has been pre-programmed and corresponds to particular value that is later on used to define the statistical data that is used to analyze the overall result of the experimentation.

The figures used presents a human face with two opposite emotional distinctions [i.e: half of the face is happy and half of the face is sad]. Assumed to take a conditional distinction of emotions, the response of the participants has been measured in two-part division that separates the first approach analysis from the second phase interpretation of the figure.

Data Analysis

In relation to how the mind responds to the figure at the first hand of presentation, it has been realized that the participants often look at the right part of the face. Not immediately correlating the two faces of the emotional presentation in the picture, the participants often respond to one of the emotions shown. This process allows for the distinctive proof that the cognitive way of thinking utilized by a person is often guided through a primary understanding of a matter. The second part of the analysis could not occur without the condition by which the participants first define what they see at the moment that they sit down and stare at what the computer shows them. The mind then is expected to randomly choose between the two side of the face would it actually interpret first. Most likely, this would depend on which side of the brain functions in primary command over the other. The left and right hemisphere function of the brain is then identified through this process.

On the second part of the process though, the cognitive capacity of the participants to identify the image as a whole comes into distinctive use. The function of the mind to correlate what is presented in the image as a whole is the tricky part, which specifically involves the need of the participant to utilize experience, learning and understanding when it comes to interpreting the whole image of the separately different emotions shown through one face only.

Discussion

Overall, the experiment shows how the symmetry between the right and the left hemisphere of the brain works to define emotional distinction based on the images shown to the participants. The mind’s cognition with the images that the eyes are able to see indicates the capacity of the human brain to immediately capture the condition of thinking that is based upon experiences and how one relates the present to the past. This means that the memory stored in the mind tends to work when a particular point of analysis is required. Most often than not, the participants’ response to the first phase of the experiment was relatively due to what is perceived to be most convenient for interpretation hence imposing that the participant take shorter time in interpreting the image compared to the second phase of the process. The correlation of the meaning of the image as a whole dictated for a more in depth definition of the matter especially in relation to the emotional presentation that the image portrays. Notably, from the results garnered from the experiment, it has been shown that the mind tries to distinguish collaboration through separately seeing the two sides of the face and later on correlating how they are actually able to define one unified concept only. The choices provided for the participants to define their analysis and interpretation of the images suggested a sense of distinction on how the mind tries to examine a matter based on visual manipulation which stipulates the interpretation desired to be accomplished in the process.

References

Coren, Stanley; Lawrence M. Ward, James T. Enns (1999). Sensation and Perception. Harcourt Brace. p.9.

Lycan, W.G., (ed.). (1999). Mind and Cognition: An Anthology, 2nd Edition. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers, Inc.

Stanovich, Keith (2009). What Intelligence Tests Miss: The Psychology of Rational Thought. New Haven (CT): Yale University Press.

Sternberg, R. J., & Sternberg, K. (2009). Cognitive psychology (6th Ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.