Abstract
Two experiments investigated (1) how activation of manual affordances is triggered by visual and linguistic cues to manipulable objects and (2) whether graspable object parts play a special role in this process. Participants pressed a key to categorize manipulable target objects copresented with manipulable distractor objects on a computer screen. Three factors were varied in Experiment 1: (1) the target’s and (2) the distractor’s handles’ orientation congruency with the lateral manual response and (3) the Visual Focus on one of the objects. In Experiment 2, a linguistic cue factor was added to these three factors—participants heard the name of one of the two objects prior to the target display onset. Analysis of participants’ motor and oculomotor behaviour confirmed that perceptual and linguistic cues potentiated activation of grasp affordances. Both target- and distractor-related affordance effects were modulated by the presence of visual and linguistic cues. However, a differential visual attention mechanism subserved activation of compatibility effects associated with target and distractor objects. We also registered an independent implicit attention attraction effect from objects’ handles, suggesting that graspable parts automatically attract attention during object viewing. This effect was further amplified by visual but not linguistic cues, thus providing initial evidence for a recent hypothesis about differential roles of visual and linguistic information in potentiating stable and variable affordances (Borghi in Language and action in cognitive neuroscience. Psychology Press, London, 2012).
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Of course, upon hearing cup one would not only represent its typical shape and weight but also assume that a typical cup has a handle. However, what would not be available from hearing cup is how this handle is oriented because the semantic information in cup does not cue a particular handle orientation and/or location. A richer linguistic cue (e.g., cup with a handle on the left) should, in principle, activate both stable and variable affordances.
References
Adamo M, Ferber S (2009) A picture says more than a thousand words: behavioural and ERP evidence for attentional enhancements due to action affordances. Neuropsychologia 47:1600–1608
Ambrosini E, Scorolli C, Borghi AM, Costantini M (2012) Which body for embodied cognition? Affordance and language within actual and perceived reaching space. Conscious Cogn 21:1551–1557
Anderson SJ, Yamagishi N, Karavia V (2002) Attentional processes link perception and action. Proc R Soc Ser B 269:1225–1232
Annett M (1970) A classification of hand preference by association analysis. Br J Psychol 61:303–321
Barsalou LW (2008) Grounded cognition. Annu Rev Psychol 59:617–645
Borghi AM (2012) Action language comprehension affordances and goals. In: Coello Y, Bartolo A (eds) Language and action in cognitive neuroscience. Psychology Press, London, pp 531–556
Borghi AM, Riggio L (2009) Sentence comprehension and simulation of object temporary canonical and stable affordances. Brain Res 1253:117–128
Bub DN, Masson MEJ (2010) Grasping beer mugs: on the dynamics of alignment effects induced by handled objects. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 36:341–358
Bub DN, Masson MEJ, Cree GS (2008) Evocation of functional and volumetric gestural knowledge by objects and words. Cognition 106:27–58
Costantini M, Ambrosini E, Scorolli C, Borghi AM (2011) When objects are close to me: affordances in the peripersonal space. Psychon Bull Rev 18:32–38
Craighero L, Fadiga L, Rizzolatti G, Umiltà C (1999) Action for perception: a motor-visual attentional effect. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 25:1673–1692
Craighero L, Bello A, Fadiga L, Rizzolatti G (2002) Hand action preparation influences the responses to hand pictures. Neuropsychologia 40:492–502
Creem SH, Proffitt DR (2001) Grasping objects by their handles: a necessary interaction between cognition and action. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 27:218–228
Derbyshire N, Ellis R, Tucker M (2006) The potentiation of two components of the reach-to-grasp action during object categorisation in visual memory. Acta Psychol 122(1):74–98
di Pellegrino G, Rafal R, Tipper SP (2005) Implicitly evoked actions modulate visual selection: evidence from parietal extinction. Curr Biol 15(16):469–1472
Ellis R, Tucker M (2000) Micro-affordance: the potentiation of actions by seen objects. Br J Psychol 91:451–471
Ellis R, Tucker M, Symes E, Vainio L (2007) Does selecting one visual object from several require inhibition of the actions associated with non-selected objects? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 33:670–691
Ferri F, Riggio L, Gallese V, Costantini M (2011) Objects and their nouns in peripersonal space. Neuropsychologia 49:3519–3524
Fischer B, Breitmeyer B (1987) Mechanisms of visual attention revealed by saccadic eye movements. Neuropsychologia 25:73–83
Fischer MH, Dahl C (2007) The time course of visuo-motor affordances. Exp Brain Res 176(3):519–524
Gibson JJ (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin, Boston
Glover S, Dixon P (2002) Semantics affect the planning but not control of grasping. Exp Brain Res 146:383–387
Glover S, Rosenbaum DA, Graham J, Dixon P (2004) Grasping the meaning of words. Exp Brain Res 154:103–108
Goodale MA (2011) Transforming vision into action. Vis Res 51:1567–1587
Handy TC, Grafton ST, Shroff NM, Ketay S, Gazzaniga MS (2003) Graspable objects grasp attention when the potential for action is recognized. Nat Neurosci 6:421–427
Handy TC, Borg JS, Turk DJ, Tipper CM, Grafton ST, Gazzaniga MS (2005) Placing a tool in the spotlight: spatial attention modulates visuomotor responses in cortex. NeuroImage 26:266–276
Hommel B (1993) The role of attention for the Simon effect. Psychol Res 55:208–222
Humphreys GW, Yoon EY, Kumar S, Lestou V, Kitadono K, Roberts KL, Riddoch MJ (2010) The interaction of attention and action: from seeing action to acting on perception. Br J Psychol 101:185–206
Klatzky RL, Pellegrino JW, McCloskey BP, Doherty S (1989) Can you squeeze a tomato? The role of motor representations in semantic sensibility judgments. J Mem Lang 28:56–77
Kostov K, Janyan A (2012) The role of attention in the affordance effect: can we afford to ignore it? Cogn Process 13:S215–S218
Lindemann O, Stenneken P, van Schie H, Bekkering H (2006) Semantic activation in action planning. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 32(3):633–643
Loach D, Bruce N, Tsotsos JK (2008) An attentional mechanism for selecting appropriate actions afforded by graspable objects. Psychol Sci 19:1253–1257
Martin A (2007) The representation of object concepts in the brain. Annu Rev Psychol 58:25–45
Masson MEJ, Bub DN, Newton-Taylor M (2008a) Language-based access to gestural components of conceptual knowledge. Q J Exp Psychol 71:869–882
Masson MEJ, Bub DN, Warren CM (2008b) Kicking calculators: contribution of embodied representations to sentence comprehension. J Mem Lang 59:256–265
Michaels CF (1989) S-R compatibilities depend on eccentricity of responding hand. Q J Exp Psychol 41(2):263–272
Michaels CF (1993) Destination compatibility affordances and coding rules—a reply. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 19(5):1121–1127
Neumann E, DeSchepper BG (1992) An inhibition-based fan effect: evidence for an active suppression mechanism in selective attention. Can J Psychol 46:1–40
Pappas Z, Mack A (2008) Potentiation of action by undetected affordant objects. Vis Cognit 16(7):892–915
Phillips JC, Ward R (2002) S-r correspondence effects of irrelevant visual affordance: time course and specificity of response activation. Vis Cognit 9(4–5):540–558
Posner MI, Cohen Y (1984) Components of visual orienting. In: Bouma H, Bowhui DG (eds) Attention and performance, vol X. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 531–556
Riggio L, Patteri I, Oppo A, Buccino G, Umilta C (2006) The role of affordances in inhibition of return. Psychon Bull Rev 13:1085–1090
Riggio C, Iani E, Gherri F, Benatti S, Rubichi R, Nicoletti R (2008) The role of attention in the occurrence of the affordance effect. Acta Psychol 127:449–458
Roth HL, Lora AN, Heilman KM (2002) Effects of monocular viewing and eye dominance on spatial attention. Brain 125:2023–2035
Schuch S, Bayliss AP, Klein C, Tipper SP (2010) Attention modulates motor system activation during action observation: evidence for inhibitory rebound. Exp Brain Res 205:235–249
Singhal A, Culham JC, Chinellato E, Goodale MA (2007) Dual-task interference is greater in delayed grasping than in visually guided grasping. J Vis 7(5):1–12
Symes E, Tucker M, Ellis R, Vainio L, Ottoboni G (2008) Grasp preparation improves change detection for congruent objects. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 34(4):854–871
Symes E, Ottoboni G, Tucker M, Ellis R, Tessari A (2010) When motor attention improves selective attention: the dissociating role of saliency. Q J Exp Psychol 63(7):1387–1397
Thill S, Caligiore D, Borghi AM, Ziemke T, Baldassarre G (2013) Theories and computational models of affordance and mirror systems: an integrative review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 37:491–521
Tipper SP, Weaver B, Cameron S, Brehaut JC, Bastedo J (1991) Inhibitory mechanisms of attention in identification and localization tasks: time course and disruption. J Exp Psychol. Learn Mem Cognit 17(4):681–692
Tipper SP, Paul MA, Hayes AE (2006) Vision for action: the effects of object property discrimination and action state on affordance compatibility effects. Psychon Bull Rev 13(3):493–498
Tschentscher N, Fischer MH (2008) Grasp cueing and joint attention. Exp Brain Res (Experimentelle Hirnforschung. Expérimentation cérébrale) 190(4):493–498
Tucker M, Ellis R (1998) On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 24:830–846
Tucker M, Ellis R (2001) The potentiation of grasp types during visual object categorization. Vis Cognit 8:769–800
Tucker M, Ellis R (2004) Action priming by briefly presented objects. Acta Psychol 116:185–203
Vainio L, Ellis R, Tucker M (2007) The role of visual attention in action priming. Q J Exp Psychol 60:241–261
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the EPSRC Grant EP/F026471.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Myachykov, A., Ellis, R., Cangelosi, A. et al. Visual and linguistic cues to graspable objects. Exp Brain Res 229, 545–559 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-013-3616-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-013-3616-z