Why Is There So Much More Research on Vision Than on Any Other Sensory Modality?

Abstract

Why is there so much more research on vision than on any other sensory modality? There is a seemingly easy answer to this question: It is because vision is our most important and most complex sense. Although there are arguments in favor of this explanation, it can be challenged in two ways: by showing that the arguments regarding the importance and complexity of vision are debatable and by demonstrating that there are other aspects that need to be taken into account. Here, I argue that the explanation is debatable, as there are various ways of defining “importance” and “complexity” and, as there is no clear consensus that vision is indeed the most important and most complex of our senses. Hence, I propose two additional explanations: According to the methodological-structural explanation, there is more research on vision because the available, present-day technology is better suited for studying vision than for studying other modalities – an advantage which most likely is the result of an initial bias toward vision, which reinforces itself. Possible reasons for such an initial bias are discussed. The cultural explanation emphasizes that the dominance of the visual is not an unchangeable constant, but rather the result of the way our societies are designed and thus heavily influenced by human decision-making. As it turns out, there is no universal hierarchy of the senses, but great historical and cross-cultural variation. Realizing that the dominance of the visual is socially and culturally reinforced and not simply a law of nature, gives us the opportunity to take a step back and to think about the kind of sensory environments we want to create and about the kinds of theories that need to be developed in research.

Does the Attentional Boost Effect Depend on the Intentionality of Encoding? Investigating the Mechanisms Underlying Memory for Visual Objects Presented at Behaviorally Relevant Moments in Time

“…However, this assumption has been challenged by various studies published in the last decade, demonstrating that detailed and durable long-term memory representations are formed as a natural product of perception. While most studies have investigated visual long-term memory (Vogt and Magnussen, 2007;Brady et al, 2008;Konkle et al, 2010;Kuhbandner et al, 2017), similar results have been obtained for auditory (Hutmacher and Kuhbandner, 2020) and haptic (Hutmacher and Kuhbandner, 2018) long-term memory (for the reasons behind the dominance of vision in research, see Hutmacher, 2019). In short, performance in these studies indicated that much more of the incoming perceptual information is stored in long-term memory than previously believed.…”

Individual importance of olfaction decreases with duration of smell loss

“…Although studies dedicated to assessing the individual significance of olfaction have demonstrated differences between health and disease, there is a gap of knowledge with respect to the mechanisms for these differences (14)(15)(16) . This is not surprising, considering that the olfactory system still remains a "neglected sense" (1,28,29) , which is also reflected in the number of studies conducted compared to other sensory organs (30) . Moreover, the improvable management and counselling of patients with OD prior to their presentation at Smell and Taste clinics also demonstrates the need to raise awareness and literacy among the medical profession for the sense of smell (28,31) .…”

Attention in Psychology, Neuroscience, and Machine Learning

“…A large portion of the study of attention in systems neuroscience and psychology centers on visual attention in particular (Kanwisher and Wojciulik, 2000). This may reflect the general trend in these fields to emphasis the study of visual processing over other sensory systems (Hutmacher, 2019), along with the dominant role vision plays in the primate brain.…”