Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00426-017-0848-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
A critical question for theories of spatial vision concerns the nature of the inputs to perception. The action-specific account asserts that information related to action, specifically a perceiver’s ability to perform the intended action, is one of these sources of information. This claim challenges assumptions about the mind in general and perception in particular, and not surprisingly, has been met with much resistance. Alternative explanations include that these effects are due to response bias, rather than genuine differences in perception. Using a paradigm in which ease to block a ball impacts estimated speed of the ball, participants were given explicit feedback about their perceptual judgements to test the response bias alternative. Despite the feedback, the action-specific effect still persisted, thus ruling out a response-bias interpretation. Coupled with other research ruling out additional alternative explanations, the current findings offer an important step towards the claim that a person’s ability to act truly influences spatial perception.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 182 KB)426_2017_848_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Asch, S. E. (1955). Opinions and Social Pressure. Scientific American, 193(5), 31–35. CrossRef
Biederman, I., & Shiffrar, M. M. (1987). Sexing day-old chicks: a case study and expert systems analysis of a difficult perceptual-learning task. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition, 13, 640–645. CrossRef
Choe, C. S., Welch, R. B., Gilford, R. M., & Joula, J. F. (1975). The “ventriloquist effect”: visual dominance or response bias? Perception and Psychophysics, 18(1), 55–60. CrossRef
Grove, P. M., Ashton, J., Kawachi, Y., & Sakurai, K. (2012). Auditory transients do not affect visual sensitivity in discriminating between objective streaming and bouncing events. Journal of Vision, 12(8), 1–11. CrossRef
Loomis, J. M. (2016). Proposed applications of research on action-specific effects are premature. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 5(1), 77–79. CrossRef
Loomis, J. M., & Philbeck, J. W. (2008). Measuring perception with spatial updating and action. In R. L. Klatzky, M. Behrmann & B. MacWhinney (Eds.), Embodiment, ego-space, and action (pp. 1–44). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Proffitt, D. R. (2008). An action-specific approach to spatial perception. In R. L. Klatzky, B. MacWhinney & M. Behrmann (Eds.), Embodiment, ego-space, and action (pp. 179–202). New York: Psychology Press.
Proffitt, D. R., & Linkenauger, S. A. (2013). Perception viewed as a phenotypic expression. In W. Prinz, M. Beisert & A. Herwig (Eds.), Action science: Foundations of an emerging discipline (pp. 171–198). Cambridge: MIT Press. CrossRef
Rosenthal, O., Shimojo, S., & Shams, L. (2009). Sound-induced flash illusion is resistant to feedback training. Brian Topography, 21, 185–192. CrossRef
van der Kamp, J., Withagen, R., & de Witt, M. M. (2013). Cultural and learning differences in the Judd illusion. Attention Perception and Psychophysics, 75, 1027–1038. CrossRef
Witt, J. K. (2016a). Action potential influences spatial perception: evidence for genuine top-down effects on perception. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review.
Witt, J. K. (2016b). Perception and action. In J. T. Wixted (Ed.), Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience, fourth edition (Fourth ed., Vol. 2). New York: Wiley.
Witt, J. K. (2016c). Spatial biases from action. In T. Hubbard (Ed.), Spatial biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Witt, J. K., Tenhundfeld, N. T., & Bielak, A. A. M. (2017). Dissociating perception from judgment in the action-specific effect of blocking ease on perceived speed. Attention Perception and Psychophysics, 79(1), 283–297. CrossRef
- What you see and what you are told: an action-specific effect that is unaffected by explicit feedback
Zachary R. King
Nathan L. Tenhundfeld
Jessica K. Witt
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg