Literature DB >> 22449126

Perceiving event dynamics and parsing Hollywood films.

James E Cutting1, Kaitlin L Brunick, Ayse Candan.   

Abstract

We selected 24 Hollywood movies released from 1940 through 2010 to serve as a film corpus. Eight viewers, three per film, parsed them into events, which are best termed subscenes. While watching a film a second time, viewers scrolled through frames and recorded the frame number where each event began. Viewers agreed about 90% of the time. We then analyzed the data as a function of a number of visual variables: shot transitions, shot duration, shot scale, motion, luminance, and color across shots within and across events, and a code that noted changes in place or time. We modeled viewer parsings across all shots of each film and found that, as an ensemble, the visual variables accounted for about 30% of the variance in the data, even without considering the soundtrack. Adding a code recording place and/or time change increases this variance to about 50%. We conclude that there is ample perceptual information for viewers to parse films into events without necessarily considering the intentions and goals of the actors, although these are certainly needed to understand the story of the film.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22449126     DOI: 10.1037/a0027737

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  16 in total

1.  Does semantic knowledge influence event segmentation and recall of text?

Authors:  Kimberly M Newberry; Heather R Bailey
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2019-08

2.  Zooming in on visual narrative comprehension.

Authors:  Tom Foulsham; Neil Cohn
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2020-10-06

3.  Semantic knowledge attenuates age-related differences in event segmentation and episodic memory.

Authors:  Barbara L Pitts; Maverick E Smith; Kimberly M Newberry; Heather R Bailey
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2021-09-22

Review 4.  Narrative theory and the dynamics of popular movies.

Authors:  James E Cutting
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-12

5.  Differential effects of knowledge and aging on the encoding and retrieval of everyday activities.

Authors:  Maverick E Smith; Kimberly M Newberry; Heather R Bailey
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2019-12-19

6.  Screenomics: A Framework to Capture and Analyze Personal Life Experiences and the Ways that Technology Shapes Them.

Authors:  Byron Reeves; Nilam Ram; Thomas N Robinson; James J Cummings; C Lee Giles; Jennifer Pan; Agnese Chiatti; M J Cho; Katie Roehrick; Xiao Yang; Anupriya Gagneja; Miriam Brinberg; Daniel Muise; Yingdan Lu; Mufan Luo; Andrew Fitzgerald; Leo Yeykelis
Journal:  Hum Comput Interact       Date:  2019-03-13       Impact factor: 4.750

7.  Facial expression, size, and clutter: Inferences from movie structure to emotion judgments and back.

Authors:  James E Cutting; Kacie L Armstrong
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Eyeblink rate watching classical Hollywood and post-classical MTV editing styles, in media and non-media professionals.

Authors:  Celia Andreu-Sánchez; Miguel Ángel Martín-Pascual; Agnès Gruart; José María Delgado-García
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Fandom Biases Retrospective Judgments Not Perception.

Authors:  Markus Huff; Frank Papenmeier; Annika E Maurer; Tino G K Meitz; Bärbel Garsoffky; Stephan Schwan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-02-24       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Temporal fractals in movies and mind.

Authors:  James E Cutting; Jordan E DeLong; Kaitlin L Brunick
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2018-03-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.