Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
We investigated the role of executive control processes in the activation of manual affordances in two experiments combining stimulus–response compatibility (SRC) and dual-task paradigms. We registered an inverse SRC effect in the presence of a parallel backward-counting task in Experiment 1, and a cancellation of the SRC effect in Experiment 2 when a parallel Stroop-like task was used. We interpret our data as supporting a self-inhibition account of the affordance activation control. Accordingly, the role of executive processes is to prevent self-inhibition in supraliminal conditions: when cognitive resources are depleted by a parallel task, the self-inhibition mechanism becomes active and irrelevantly potentiated affordances are inhibited, leading to the emergence of an inverse SRC effect. In addition, the difference between data patterns observed in the two experiments suggests that the exact roles of the executive processes involved during the activation of affordances may differ. The results suggest a mechanism for action-related activation monitoring based on a flexible control over automatically potentiated actions. The paper discusses the proposed mechanism in detail and outlines further research directions.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Anderson, S.J., Yamagishi, N., Karavia, V. (2002). Attentional processes link perception and action. Proceedings of the Royal Society Series B. 269, 1225–1232.
Baddeley, A. (1996). Exploring the central executive. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 49(1), 5–28. CrossRef
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300.
Borghi, A.M. (2012). Action language comprehension affordances and goals. In Coello Y, Bartolo A (eds) Language and action in cognitive neuroscience. Psychology Press, pp 531–556.
Boy, F., Husain, M., & Sumner, P. (2010). Unconscious inhibition separates two forms of cognitive control. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(24), 11134–11139. CrossRef
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, 341–358. PubMed
Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (1998). Effects of masked stimuli on motor activation: behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(6), 1737–1747. PubMed
Eimer, M., Schubö, A., & Schlaghecken, F. (2002). The locus of inhibition in the masked priming of response alternatives. Journal of Motor Behaviour, 34, 3–10. CrossRef
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? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 670–691.
Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception and Psychophysics, 16(1), 143–149. CrossRef
Geusebroek, J. M., Burghouts, G. J., & Smeulders, A. W. M. (2005). The Amsterdam library of object images. International Journal of Computer Vision, 61(1), 103–112. CrossRef
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton.
Handy, T.C., Borg, J.S., Turk, D.J., Tipper, C.M., Grafton, S.T., Gazzaniga, M.S. (2005). Placing a tool in the spotlight: Spatial attention modulates visuomotor responses in cortex. NeuroImage, 26, 266–276.
Klapp, S. T., & Hinkley, L. B. (2002). The negative compatibility effect: unconscious inhibition influences reaction time and response selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 255–269. CrossRef
Kostov, K., & Janyan, A. (2012). The role of attention in the affordance effect: can we afford to ignore it? Cognitive Processing, 13, 215–218. CrossRef
Lhermitte, F. (1983). ‘Utilization behaviour’ and its relation to lesions of the frontal lobes. Brain, 106, 237–255.
Makris, S., & Yarrow, K. (2014). Unconscious presentation of object affordances evokes a negative compatibility effect. i-Perception, 5(5), 489-489.
Norman, D. A., & Shallice, T. (2000). Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior (pp. 376–390). Cognitive neuroscience: A reader.
Pappas, Z., & Mack, A. (2008). Potentiation of action by undetected affordant objects. Visual Cognition, 16(7), 892–915.
Phillips, J.C., & Ward, R. (2002). S-r correspondence effects of irrelevant visual affordance: Time course and specificity of response activation. Visual Cognition, 9(4–5), 540–558.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643–662. CrossRef
Sumner, P. (2007). Negative and positive masked-priming–implications for motor inhibition. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3(1–2), 317–326. CrossRef
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive science, 12(2), 257–285. CrossRef
Symes, E., Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (2005). Dissociating object-based and space-based affordances. Visual Cognition, 12(7), 1337–1361. CrossRef
Thill, S., Caligiore, D., Borghi, A.M., Ziemke, T., Baldassarre, G. (2013). Theories and computational models of affordance and mirror systems: An integrative review. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 37, 491–521.
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, 13(3), 493–498.
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.
Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (2001). The potentiation of grasp types during visual object categorization. Visual Cognition, 8, 769–800.
Vainio, L., Ellis, R., Tucker, M. (2007). The role of visual attention in action priming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 241-261.
Whitaker, L. A. (1979). Dual-task interference as a function of cognitive processing load. Acta Psychologica, 43(1), 71–84. CrossRef
Wilf, M., Holmes, N. P., Schwartz, I., & Makin, T. R. (2012). Dissociating between object affordances and spatial compatibility effects using early response components. Frontiers in Psychology, 4.
- The role of executive control in the activation of manual affordances
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg