Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kuleshov effect

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 36 posts

Re: Kuleshov effect

#11

Post by petercooper »

0815test wrote: post #9
PavlikPaja wrote: post #5

I wonder how is the lack of this effect connected to autism.

I wonder about this as well. That example on Wikipedia had no effect on me. On the other hand could it be the advertising industry using it too much and some people getting "anesthetized" to it? I don't think it's autism for me because generally I'm hyper aware of people's emotions.

I came to the comments specifically to make a similar point and was glad to see people already addressing it. I (diagnosed ASD) watched the video on Wikipedia and thought it was weird he had the same neutral expression each time.

Re: Kuleshov effect

#12

Post by LoSboccacc »

cosmic_ape wrote: post #7

There probably is a similar effect when people look at their own photos versus other people looking at the same photos. Wonder if anyone experimentally verified that.

It's likely linked to the fact that phones mirror selfies because that matches oneself mental image better

Re: Kuleshov effect

#13

Post by scardine »

PavlikPaja wrote: post #5

I wonder how is the lack of this effect connected to autism.

In a neurotypical person the "GPU" of the brain is used for face and body language recognition. I like to think the "GPU" is used for other things when you fit the AS - it seems logical that when using different circuitry for the task you will hit different illusions (different biases in the algorithm).

Re: Kuleshov effect

#14

Post by heyjudy »

It's a manifestation of back-rationalization whereby future experiences alter and redefine memories of the past. This is just another example of how people are infinitely manipulatable, unreliable and that their memories, and even their experiences, are entirely mutable.

Re: Kuleshov effect

#15

Post by heyjudy »

PavlikPaja wrote: post #5

I wonder how is the lack of this effect connected to autism.

It's difficult to say precisely. Someone with classic autism most likely wouldn't be able to interpret the implications of Hitchcock edit sequences because it would require Theory of Mind and social inference. Aspergers would likely have a better chance, but it might not be innately, immediately obvious to them.

Re: Kuleshov effect

#16

Post by mysterypie »

marius_k wrote: post #6

This scene from Monty Python's Holy Grail came back to my mind: https://youtu.be/DPXG4pdPj4w?t=18

> [Monty Python scene of two guards who see a distant hazy image of a knight charging the castle, but do nothing because the image is so distant and hazy, but are surprised when the knight finally arrives and kills one of them]

I'm intrigued that you used that particular scene as an example.

I've watched a lot of Monty Python and I've seen this movie at least a couple times, but that scene makes no sense to me. I don't get how it's supposed to be funny and why it's even there. It is possible to explain it?

Re: Kuleshov effect

#17

Post by heyjudy »

petercooper wrote: post #11
0815test wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder about this as well. That example on Wikipedia had no effect on me. On the other hand could it be the advertising industry using it too much and some people getting "anesthetized" to it? I don't think it's autism for me because generally I'm hyper aware of people's emotions.

I came to the comments specifically to make a similar point and was glad to see people already addressing it. I (diagnosed ASD) watched the video on Wikipedia and thought it was weird he had the same neutral expression each time.

There's his expression in clip A, and the following subject in clip B. The viewer's impression of his social calibration (his appropriateness) in A changes after they see B.

A is a neutral expression.

B is a somber event where restraint is required: A is appropriate.

B is a happy event or perhaps a close family member: A then B implies he's cold, underwhelmed or disapproving.

B is some random, inanimate object: B holds no new social meaning of A, unless B is symbolic or a plot Macguffin.

It's the same A, but it's the clip B following it that rewrites socioemotional history of the viewer.

At a higher level of abstraction, it and other socioemotional back-rationalizations imply most people allow the future to rewrite their impression of the past, making the past not entirely cast in stone. People can easily turn on each other and then forget about it simply because they choose to rewrite history in their minds, twice.

Re: Kuleshov effect

#18

Post by benschulz »

0815test wrote: post #9
PavlikPaja wrote: post #5

I wonder how is the lack of this effect connected to autism.

I wonder about this as well. That example on Wikipedia had no effect on me. On the other hand could it be the advertising industry using it too much and some people getting "anesthetized" to it? I don't think it's autism for me because generally I'm hyper aware of people's emotions.

Apparently the study could be replicated (with a neutral expression as shown in the example). Given that, I think it's unlikely that anyone is unaffected.

I have two hypotheses:

a) It may be a kind of hindsight bias. You watched the video in the context of an article on the Kuleshov effect and knew it was the same neutral expression each time.

b) You cannot gage the mood of the embedded scene and thus cannot transfer it onto the encasing scene. The end result is that you are not affected in this instance. But it would not be because of some immunity to the Kuleshov effect itself.

Re: Kuleshov effect

#19

Post by lowercased »

mysterypie wrote: post #16
marius_k wrote: post #6

This scene from Monty Python's Holy Grail came back to my mind: https://youtu.be/DPXG4pdPj4w?t=18

> [Monty Python scene of two guards who see a distant hazy image of a knight charging the castle, but do nothing because the image is so distant and hazy, but are surprised when the knight finally arrives and kills one of them] I'm intrigued that you used that particular scene as an example. I've watched a lot of Monty Python and I've seen this movie at least a couple times, but that scene makes no sense to me. I don…

> I don't get how it's supposed to be funny and why it's even there. It is possible to explain it?

I think you just covered about 70% of monty python for me.

I think much of it falls under "if I have to explain to you, you won't get it".

FWIW, I get (and like) a lot of british humour, but really not much of MP.

Re: Kuleshov effect

#20

Post by Fnoord »

petercooper wrote: post #11
0815test wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder about this as well. That example on Wikipedia had no effect on me. On the other hand could it be the advertising industry using it too much and some people getting "anesthetized" to it? I don't think it's autism for me because generally I'm hyper aware of people's emotions.

I came to the comments specifically to make a similar point and was glad to see people already addressing it. I (diagnosed ASD) watched the video on Wikipedia and thought it was weird he had the same neutral expression each time.

Like commercials, I don't think it works when you watch with suspicion. So you cannot watch this movie and draw conclusions from it because you're focussed on the context of the Kuleshov effect (which also makes it more difficult to replicate). Even movies are different when you watch them critically.

(FWIW, I have ASD as well, and for me the expressions on his face are meaningless.)

Post reply on HN