Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Portions of this work were previously presented at the 46th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Toronto, Canada, November 2005, the 2nd Annual Computational Cognitive Neuroscience Conference, Houston, USA, November 2006, and included as part of the first author’s doctoral dissertation, March 2007.
Recent studies have reported repulsion effects between the perception of visual motion and the concurrent production of hand movements. Two models, based on the notions of common coding and internal forward modeling, have been proposed to account for these phenomena. They predict that the size of the effects in perception and action should be monotonically related and vary with the amount of similarity between what is produced and perceived. These predictions were tested in four experiments in which participants were asked to make hand movements in certain directions while simultaneously encoding the direction of an independent stimulus motion. As expected, perceived directions were repelled by produced directions, and produced directions were repelled by perceived directions. However, contrary to the models, the size of the effects in perception and action did not covary, nor did they depend (as predicted) on the amount of perception–action similarity. We propose that such interactions are mediated by the activation of categorical representations.
Ehrenstein, W. H., Cavonius, C. R., & Lewke, E. (1996). Spatial visuo-motor compatibility and manual control in a tracking task. In K. A. Brookhuis, C. Weikert, & C. R. Cavonius (Eds.), Human factors in training and simulation. (pp. 12–22). Groningen: Traffic Research Center, VSC, University of Groningen.
Grosjean, M., Zwickel, J., & Prinz, W. (2008). Acting while perceiving: assimilation precedes contrast. Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung. doi: 10.1007/s00426-008-0146-6.
Hamilton, A., Wolpert, D., & Frith, U. (2004). Your own action influences how you perceive another person’s action. Current Biology, 14(6), 493–498. Available from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VRT-4C40V0M-V/2/ab14417d7bb0fcd1036524f7c7fa7cd5.
Kunde, W., & Wühr, P. (2004). Actions blind to conceptually overlapping stimuli. Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung, 68(4), 199–207. doi: 10.1007/s00426-003-0156-3.
Müsseler, J. (1999). How independent from action control is perception? An event-coding account for more equally-ranked crosstalks. In G. Aschersleben, T. Bachmann, & J. Müsseler (Eds.), Cognitive Contributions to the Perception of Spatial and Temporal Events (vol. 129) (pp. 121–147). Amsterdam: Elsevier. CrossRef
Prinz, W. (1990). A common coding approach to perception and action. In O. Neumann & W. Prinz (Eds.), Relationships between perception and action: Current approaches (pp. 167–201). New York: Springer.
Schubö, A., Prinz, W., & Aschersleben, G. (2004). Perceiving while acting: Action affects perception. Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung, 68(4), 208–215.
Stevanovski, B., Oriet, C., & Jolicoeur, P. (2006). Symbolic-and response-related contributions to blindness to compatible stimuli. Visual Cognition, 14(3), 326–350. Available from http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article&10.1080/13506280500296470.
Van Sommers, P. (1984). Drawing and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- On interference effects in concurrent perception and action