Compare and Contrast Gibson’s and Gregory’s theories of perception Gibson’s and Gregory’s theories of perception both suggest that eye-retina is important for perception. The both believe that without eye-retina, a person will not be able to see. This is a common view of both of the theories of perception. The idea is supported by the case of SB. SB was a man who had been blind from birth due to cataracts. When he was 52, he had an operation which restored his sight and hence he could see. Thus, this case has shown the importance of eye-retina for things to be perceived. And therefore, supports both of theories of perception which eye-retina is essential for perception.
Gibson believes in the direct theories of perception which …show more content…

Gregory also suggests that we use context for our perceptions which Gibson disagrees. There are supporting evidences for Gregory’s assumptions. Selfridge’s study has shown context effects on visual perception. This study suggests that context aids perception. Similarly, Boring has demonstrated the use of top-down processing as well as the fact that context influences visual perception. These two studies demonstrate that visual perception is influenced by context.
In addition, Gregory’s idea is supported by the study carried out by Warren which context influences auditory perception as well. The participants used context to hear the word in the sentence entirely. This shows the importance of context which helps to fill in the missing words. These findings suggested that it may be true that context is necessary for perception to occur successfully. These studies support Gregory’s theory instead of Gibson’s. Furthermore, Gregory’s theory explains how we can make errors in perception. For instance, we do not necessarily see spelling errors in our written work as we word- through-context.

Besides, Gregory suggests that we use stored knowledge and past experience to make sense of our visual environment which Gibson does not agree.

Moreover, Gregory suggested that some forms of background knowledge, through learning, are needed to make sense of the environment than just the sensory input as