Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Increasing evidence suggests that perception and action planning do not represent separable stages of a unidirectional processing sequence, but rather emerging properties of highly interactive processes. To capture these characteristics of the human cognitive system, we have developed a connectionist model of the interaction between perception and action planning: HiTEC, based on the Theory of Event Coding (Hommel et al. in Behav Brain Sci 24:849–937, 2001). The model is characterized by representations at multiple levels and by shared representations and processes. It complements available models of stimulus–response translation by providing a rationale for (1) how situation-specific meanings of motor actions emerge, (2) how and why some aspects of stimulus–response translation occur automatically and (3) how task demands modulate sensorimotor processing. The model is demonstrated to provide a unitary account and simulation of a number of key findings with multiple experimental paradigms on the interaction between perception and action such as the Simon effect, its inversion (Hommel in Psychol Res 55:270–279, 1993), and action–effect learning.
Amit, D. J., & Brunel, N. (1999). Model of global spontaneous activity and local structured activity during delay periods in the cerebral cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 7, 237–252. CrossRef
Ansorge, U., & Wühr, P. (2004). A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 365–377. PubMed
Bargh, J. A. (1989). Conditional automaticity: Varieties of automatic influence in social perception and cognition. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 3–51). New York: Guilford Press.
Braitenberg, V., & Schüz, A. (1991). Anatomy of the cortex: Statistics and geometry. Heidelberg: Springer. CrossRef
Butz, M. V. & Pezzulo, G. (2008). Benefits of anticipations in cognitive agents. In G. Pezzulo., M. V. Butz., & C. Castelfranchi (Eds.), The challenge of anticipation, a unifying framework for the analysis and design of artificial cognitive systems, LNAI (Vol. 5225, pp. 45–62). Heidelberg: Springer
Cowey, A. (1985). Aspects of cortical organization related to selective attention and selective impairments of visual perception: A tutorial review. In M. I. Poster & O. S. M. Marin (Eds.), Attention and performance XI (pp. 41–62). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
DeJong, R., Liang, C.-C., & Lauber, E. (1994). Conditional and unconditional automaticity: A dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus–response correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 731–750.
DeYoe, E. A., & Van Essen, D. C. (1988). Concurrent processing streams in monkey visual cortex. Trends in Neuroscience, 11, 219–226. CrossRef
Donders, F. C. (1868). Over de snelheid van psychische processen. Onderzoekingen, gedaan in het physiologisch laboratorium der Utrechtsche hoogeschool, 2. reeks, 2, 92–120.
Elsner, B., & Hommel, B. (2001). Effect anticipation and action control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 229–240. PubMed
Grossberg, S., & Somers, D. (1991). Synchronized oscillations during cooperative feature linking in a cortical model of visual perception. Neural Networks, 4, 453–466. CrossRef
Haazebroek, P., & Hommel, B. (2009). Anticipative control of voluntary action: Towards a computational model. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 5499, 31–47.
Haazebroek, P., van Dantzig, S., & Hommel, B. (2009). Towards a computational account of context mediated affective stimulus-response translation. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Hommel, B. (1993). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information. Psychological Research, 55, 270–279. CrossRef
Hommel, B. (2000). The prepared reflex: Automaticity and control in stimulus-response translation. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance (Vol. XVIII, pp. 247–273). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Hommel, B. (2010). Grounding attention in action control: The intentional control of selection. In B. J. Bruya (Ed.), Effortless attention: A new perspective in the cognitive science of attention and action (pp. 121–140). Cambridge: MIT Press. CrossRef
Hommel, B., & Elsner, B. (2009). Acquisition, representation, and control of action. In E. Morsella, J. A. Bargh, & P. M. Gollwitzer (Eds.), Oxford handbook of human action (pp. 371–398). New York: Oxford University Press.
James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology (Vol. 2). New York: Dover Publications. CrossRef
Keele, S. W. (1968). Movement control in skilled motor performance. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 387–403. CrossRef
Kornblum, S., Stevens, G. T., Whipple, A., & Requin, J. (1999). The effects of irrelevant stimuli 1: The time course of stimulus–stimulus and stimulus–response consistency effects with Stroop-like stimuli, Simon-like tasks, and their factorial combinations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 688–714.
Lotze, R. H. (1852). Medicinische Psychologie oder die Physiologie der Seele. Leipzig: Weidmann’sche Buchhandlung.
Milner, A. D., & Goodale, M. A. (1995). The visual brain in action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Monsell, S. (1996). Control of mental processes. In V. Bruce (Ed.), Unsolved mysteries of the mind: tutorial essays in cognition (pp. 93–148). Hove: Erlbaum.
Murre, J. M. J., Phaf, R. H., & Wolters, G. (1992). CALM: Categorizing and learning module. Neural Networks, 5, 55–82. CrossRef
Müsseler, J., & Hommel, B. (1997). Blindness to response-compatible stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 861–872. PubMed
Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Nuxoll, A., & Laird, J. E. (2004). A cognitive model of episodic memory integrated with a general cognitive architecture. In Proceedings of the international conference on cognitive modeling.
Prinz, W. (1990). A common coding approach to perception and action. In O. Neumann & W. Prinz (Eds.), Relationships between perception and action (pp. 167–201). Berlin: Springer. CrossRef
Prinz, J. (2006). Is the mind really modular? In R. Stainten (Ed.), Contemporary debates in cognitive science (pp. 22–36). New York: Blackwell.
Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus–response compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Riggio, L., Gawryszewski, L. D. G., & Umiltà, C. (1986). What is crossed in crossed-hand effects? Acta Psychologica, 62, 89–100. CrossRef
Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1986). A general framework for parallel distributed processing. In D. E. Rumelhart & J. L. McClelland (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (pp. 45–76). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Sternberg, S. (1969) The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders’ method. In W. G. Koster (Ed.), Attention and performance II. Acta Psychologica, 30, 276–315.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 28, 643–662. CrossRef
Tubau, E., Hommel, B., & López-Moliner, J. (2007). Modes of executive control in sequence learning: From stimulus-based to plan-based control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 43–63. CrossRef
Umiltà, C., & Zorzi, M. (1997). Commentary on Barber and O’Leary: Learning and attention in S–R compatibility. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus response compatibility (pp. 173–178). Amsterdam: North-Holland. CrossRef
Wang, X. J. (1999). Synaptic basis of cortical persistent activity: The importance of NMDA receptors to working memory. Journal of Neuroscience, 19, 9587–9603. PubMed
Ward, R. (1999). Interactions between perception and action systems: a model for selective action. In G. W. Humphreys, J. Duncan, & A. Treisman (Eds.), Attention, space and action: Studies in cognitive neuroscience. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ward, R. (2002). Coordination and integration in perception and action. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention and performance XIV. Oxford: Oxford Press.
Wilson, H., & Cowan, J. (1972). Excitatory and inhibitory interactions in localized populations of model neurons. Biophysics Journal, 12, 1–24. CrossRef
Wykowska, A., Schubö, A., & Hommel, B. (2009). How you move is what you see: Action planning biases selection in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1755–1769. PubMed
Young, M. P. (1995). Open questions about the neural mechanisms of visual pattern recognition. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences. Cambridge: Bradford.
- HiTEC: a connectionist model of the interaction between perception and action planning
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg