Holography does not account for goodness: A critical review of Van der Helm and Leeuwenberg (1996).

C.N.L. Olivers, N. Chater, D.G. Watson

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

122 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

P. A. van der Helm and E. L. J. Leeuwenberg (1996) outlined a holographic account of figural goodness of a perceptual stimulus. The theory is mathematically precise and can be applied to a broad spectrum of empirical data. The authors argue, however, that the account is inadequate on both theoretical and empirical grounds, The theoretical difficulties concern the internal consistency of the account and its reliance on unspecified auxiliary assumptions. The account also makes counterintuitive empirical predictions, which do not fit past data or the results of a series of new experimental studies.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages19
JournalPsychological Review American Psychological Association
Volume111
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2004

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Holography does not account for goodness: A critical review of Van der Helm and Leeuwenberg (1996).'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this