Home > Positioning > Persons > Gibson, Eleanor J.

Eleanor J. Gibson (1910–2002)

Eleanor Gibson answered the question the ecological approach owed: if the information for perception is already sufficient, what is learning? The mainstream said enrichment — a poor input supplemented ever more elaborately by association and stored knowledge, so that learning adds to what the senses deliver. Gibson’s answer is differentiation: the stimulation was rich all along, and what changes is the perceiver. Learning to perceive is coming to detect distinctions and structure that were always present but not yet picked up — the wine-taster and the chick-sexer do not infer more, they notice more. Where the enrichment view has experience growing away from the stimulus, differentiation has it growing into it: an ever-finer fit between what the world offers and what the perceiver can find in it. It is ecological psychology’s account of acquisition, and she built its empirical foundations across half a century of experiments.

Life

Born Eleanor Jack in Peoria, Illinois, 1910. Undergraduate and master’s work at Smith College, where she met James Gibson, her teacher and later husband. Her doctorate was at Yale in 1938 — though not where she intended: Robert Yerkes refused to admit women to his primate laboratory, and she completed the degree under Clark Hull, on differentiation in learning, a topic she made her own against the grain of his framework. At Cornell from 1949, anti-nepotism rules kept her from a faculty post for seventeen years; she ran her research as an unpaid research associate until Cornell appointed her professor in 1966. The work continued into her eighties, and in 1992 she received the National Medal of Science, one of very few psychologists ever to do so.

Perceptual learning

Differentiation against enrichment. The programme’s founding statement is the 1955 paper with James Gibson, “Perceptual learning: differentiation or enrichment?” — the question put as a fork. Her experiments made the differentiation answer empirical: with practice, observers come to distinguish stimuli they at first could not tell apart, without feedback, reward, or any added information — nothing is supplied to them except further exposure to the same structured stimulation. What improves is the pickup: sensitivity to the distinguishing features, the invariants that separate one thing from another. Principles of Perceptual Learning and Development (1969) is the framework’s book-length statement.

The visual cliff. With Richard Walk at Cornell she built the experiment for which she is most widely known (1960): a sheet of strong glass extending over an apparent drop, with a patterned surface directly beneath the glass on one side and far below it on the other. Crawling infants would cross the shallow side and refuse the deep side, mothers beckoning notwithstanding. What the finding shows has been argued since. The strong early reading had depth perceived and its danger registered from the onset of locomotion; Joseph Campos’s heart-rate studies found interest rather than fear in pre-locomotor infants on the deep side, and Karen Adolph’s work found that avoidance is tied to locomotor experience and does not transfer across postures — an experienced crawler’s caution at a drop has to be learned again when the same infant begins to walk.

Learning to detect affordances. Her later infant work took the programme to the point where it meets her husband’s directly: what infants learn to perceive, she argued, is first of all affordances — whether a slope can be descended, a surface supports crossing, a gap is passable — each new action capability opening new affordances to be learned. Perceptual learning and the affordance concept are, in this late statement, one account seen from its two sides: what the environment offers, and how the perceiver comes to detect the offer.

Reading. She took the framework to the acquired skill par excellence: The Psychology of Reading (1975, with Harry Levin) treats learning to read as perceptual learning — differentiation of the distinctive features of letters, then of the higher-order structure of spelling patterns and words — the same progression from coarse to fine pickup, run on a surface of marks that a culture built.

The programme in development. Her later work folded perceptual learning into an ecological account of development as a whole: the infant as an active explorer whose developing action capabilities — reaching, sitting, crawling, walking — successively open new information and new affordances to be learned. Development on this picture is not a timetable of internal stages but a spiral of perceiving and acting, each new capability changing what there is to perceive.

Where Eleanor Gibson stops

The boundary internal to her own programme surfaced in the reading research, and she worked across it rather than resolving it. Differentiation accounts for the perceptual half of reading — the features of letters, the structure of spelling patterns are there in the marks, waiting to be detected. But that a given spelling pattern maps to a given sound is a fact of a writing system, not a structure of the stimulation, and in her own treatment that half is supplied by instruction and the surrounding practice while differentiation does the rest. The seam between what exposure can teach and what convention must — a live methodological question inside her research, not a limit she conceded — is where her programme’s work remained when she left it.

Key works

See also: James Gibson · Ecological psychology · Piaget