Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Theories of embodied object representation predict a tight association between sensorimotor processes and visual processing of manipulable objects. Previous research has shown that object handles can ‘potentiate’ a manual response (i.e., button press) to a congruent location. This potentiation effect is taken as evidence that objects automatically evoke sensorimotor simulations in response to the visual presentation of manipulable objects. In the present series of experiments, we investigated a critical prediction of the theory of embodied object representations that potentiation effects should be observed with manipulable artifacts but not non-manipulable animals. In four experiments we show that (a) potentiation effects are observed with animals and artifacts; (b) potentiation effects depend on the absolute size of the objects and (c) task context influences the presence/absence of potentiation effects. We conclude that potentiation effects do not provide evidence for embodied object representations, but are suggestive of a more general stimulus–response compatibility effect that may depend on the distribution of attention to different object features.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Allport, D. A. (1985). Distributed memory, modular subsystems and dysphasia. In S. D. Newman & R. Epstein (Eds.), Current perspectives in dysphasia (pp. 207–244). New York: Churchill Livingstone.
Anderson, S. J., Yamagishi, N., & Karavia, V. (2002). Attentional processes link perception and action. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 269(1497), 1225–1232. CrossRef
Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Barsalou, L. (2008). Grounded cognition. The Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645. CrossRef
Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999-0. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html. Accessed 1 Aug 2012.
Bub, D. N., & Masson, M. E. J. (2010). Grasping beer mugs: on the dynamics of alignment effects induced by handled objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(2), 341–358. PubMed
Cate, A., Goodale, M., & Köhler, S. (2011). The role of apparent size in building- and object-specific regions of ventral visual cortex. Brain Research, 4, 09–122.
Cho, D., & Proctor, R. W. (2010). The object-based Simon-effect: grasping affordance or relative location of the graspable part? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(4), 853–861. PubMed
Cho, D., & Proctor, R. W. (2011). Correspondence effects for objects with opposing left and right protrusions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(3), 737–749. PubMed
Gallese, V., & Sinigaglia, C. (2011). What is so special about embodied simulation? Trends in Cognitive Science, 15(11), 512–519. CrossRef
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Hillyard, S. A., Vogel, E. K., & Luck, S. J. (1998). Sensory gain control (amplification) as a mechanism of selective attention: electrophysiological and neuroimaging evidence. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 353(1373), 1257–1270.
Hommel, B. (1993). Inverting the Simon effect by intention. Psychological Research, 55, 270–279. CrossRef
Kirchner, H., & Thorpe, S. J. (2006). Ultra-rapid object detection with saccadic eye movements: visual processing speed revisited. Vision Research, 46(11), 1762–1776.
Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility--a model and taxonomy. Psychological review, 97(2), 253–270.
Kovic, V., Plunkett, K., & Westermann, G. (2009a). Eye-tracking study of animate objects. Psihologija, 42(3), 307–327. CrossRef
Kovic, V., Plunkett, K., & Westermann, G. (2009b). Eye-tracking study of inanimate objects. Psihologija, 42(4), 417–436. CrossRef
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Lawrence, MA. (2012). ez: Easy analysis and visualization of factorial experiments. R package version 4.1-1. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ez. Accessed 1 Aug 2012.
Masson, M. E. J., Bub, D. N., & Breuer, A. T. (2011). Priming of reach and grasp actions by handled objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(5), 1470–1484. PubMed
Murata, A., Gallese, V., Luppino, G., Kaseda, M., & Sakata, H. (2000). Selectivity for the shape, size, and orientation of objects for grasping in neurons of the monkey parietal area AIP. Journal of Neurophysiology, 83, 2580–2601. PubMed
Phillips, J. C., & Ward, R. (2002). S-R correspondence effects of irrelevant visual affordance: time course and specificity of response activation. Visual Cognition, 9, 540–558. CrossRef
Pulvermüller, F., Hauk, O., Nikulin, V. V., & Ilmoniemi, R. J. (2005). Functional links between motor and language systems. European Journal of Neuroscience, 21(3), 793–797.
Reed, C. L., Grubb, J. D., & Steele, C. (2006). Hands up: attentional prioritization of space near the hand. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(1), 166–177. PubMed
Schacter, D. L., & Buckner, R. L. (1998). Priming and the brain. Neuron, 20, 185–195.
Shapiro, L. (2011). Embodied Cognition. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Symes, E., Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (2007). Visual object affordances: object orientation. Acta Psychologia, 124, 238–255. CrossRef
R Core Team (2012). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 1 Aug 2012.
Tipper, S. P., Paul, M. A., & Hayes, A. E. (2006). Vision-for-action: the effects of object property discrimination and action state on affordance compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 3(3), 493–498. CrossRef
Tremblay, R., & Ransijn, J. (2011). LMERConvenienceFunctions: a suite of functions to back-fit fixed effects and forward-fit random effects, as well as other miscellaneous functions. R Package Version, 1(6), 7.
Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (1998). On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 830–846. PubMed
Whelan, R. (2008). Effective analysis of reaction time data. The Psychological Record, 58, 475–482.
- A test of the embodied simulation theory of object perception: potentiation of responses to artifacts and animals
Heath E. Matheson
Nicole C. White
Patricia A. McMullen
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg