Micro-affordance: The potentiation of components of action by seen objects

British Journal of Psychology

Volumn 91, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 451-471

  Ellis, Rob ^a   Tucker, Mike ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PLYMOUTH   (United Kingdom)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0007048013     PISSN: 20448295     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/000712600161934     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Allusi, E. A., & Warm, J. S. (1990). Things that go together: A review of stimulus-response compatibility and related effects. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeves (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 3-30). Amsterdam: North Holland.
2. Edelman, G. M. (1978). Group selection and phasic reentrant signaling: A theory of higher brain function. In G. M. Edelman & V. B. Mountcastle (Eds.), The mindful brain: Cortical organisation and the group-selective theory of higher brain function. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Edelman, G. M. (1987). Neural Darwinism: The theory of neuronal group selection. New York: Basic Books.
4. Eimer, M. (1995). Stimulus response compatibility and automatic response activation: Evidence from psychophysiological studies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 837-854.
5. Ellis, R. (1985). Levels of representation for visual objects. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Oxford.
6. Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (1996, July). Visual object representation, symbol grounding and action. Paper presented at the Fifth Conference of the European Society for Philosophy and Psychology, Barcelona.
7. Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (2000). The role of action in visual representation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. Manuscript under review.
8. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
9. Goodale, M. A. (1993). Visual pathways supporting perception and action in the primate cerebral cortex. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 3, 578-585.
10. Goodale, M. A., & Milner, D. A. (1992). Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends in Neurosciences, 15 (1), 20-25.
11. Goodale, M. A., Milner, A. D., Jakobson, L. S., & Carey, D. P. (1991). A neurological distinction between perceiving objects and grasping them. Nature, 349 (10), 154-156.
12. Goodale, M. A., & Servos, P. (1992). Now you see it, now you don't: How delaying an action system can transform a theory. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 15, 335-336.
13. Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D, 42, 335-346.
14. Hommel, B. (1994a). Effects of irrelevant spatial S-R compatibility depend on stimulus complexity. Psychological Research, 56, 179-184.
15. Hommel, B. (1994b). Spontaneous decay of response-code activation. Psychological Research, 56, 261-268.
16. Hommel, B. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward an empirical clarification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21 (4), 764-775.
17. Hommel, B. (1997). Toward an action-concept model of stimulus-response compatibility. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility (pp. 281-320). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
18. Jeannerod, M. (1981). Intersegmental co-ordination during reaching at natural visual objects. In J. Long & A. Baddeley (Eds.), Attention and Performance IX (pp. 153-168). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. Jeannerod, M., Paulignan, Y., Mackenzie, C., & Marteniuk, R. M. (1992). Parallel visuomotor processing in human prehension. In R. Caminiti, P. B. Johnson, & Y. Burnod (Eds.), Control of arm movement in space (pp. 27-44). Amsterdam: Springer-Verlag.
20. Kornblum, S. (1994). The way irrelevant dimensions are processed depends on what they overlap with: The case of Stroop- and Simon-like stimuli. Psychological Research, 56, 130-135.
21. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility - A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
22. Kornblum, S., & Lee, J.-W. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility with relevant and irrelevant stimulus dimensions that do and do not overlap with the response. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21 (4), 855-875.
23. Lamberts, K., Tavernier, G., & d'Ydewalle, G. (1992). Effects of multiple reference points in spatial stimulus-response compatibility. Acta Psychologica, 79, 115-130.
24. Marks, L. E. (1974). On associations of light and sound: The mediation of brightness, pitch and loudness. American Journal of Psychology, 87, 173-188.
25. Marks, L. E. (1975). On colored-hearing synesthesia: Cross-modal translations of sensory dimensions. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 303-331.
26. Marr, D. (1982). Vision. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.
27. Michaels, C. F. (1988). S-R compatibility between response position and destination of apparent motion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 231-240.
28. Michaels, C. F. (1993). Destination compatibility, affordances, and coding rules: A reply to Proctor, Van Zandt, Lu and Weeks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 19, 1121-1127.
29. Milner, D. A., & Goodale, M. A. (1993). Visual pathways to perception and action. In T. P. Hicks, S. Molotchnikoff, & T. Ono (Eds.), The visually responsive neuron: From basic neurophysiology to behavior. Progress in Brain Research, 95, 317-338.
30. Requin, J., & Riehle, A. (1995). Neural correlates of partial transmission of sensorimotor information in the cerebral cortex. Acta Psychologica, 90, 81-95.
31. Riddoch, M. J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1987). Visual object processing in a case of optic aphasis: A case of semantic access agnosia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 4, 131-185.
32. Rosenbaum, D. A., Marchak, F., Barnes, H. J., Vaughan, J., Slotta, J. D., & Jorgensen, M. J. (1990). Constraints for action selection: Overhand versus underhand grips. In M. Jeannerod (Ed.), Attention and Performance XIII (pp. 321-342). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
33. Rumiati, R. I., & Humphreys, G. W. (1998). Recognition by action: Dissociating visual and semantic routes to action in normal observers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 631-647.
34. Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions toward the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology 81, 174-176.
35. Sirigu, A., Cohen, L., Duhamel, J., Pillon, B., Dubois, B., & Agid, Y. (1995). A selective impairment of hand posture for object utilization in apraxia. Cortex, 31, 41-55.
36. Sporns, O., & Edelman, G. M. (1993). Solving Bernstein's problem: A proposal for the development of co-ordinated movement by selection. Child Development, 64, 960-981.
37. Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (1998). On the relations between seen objects and components of action. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24 (3), 1-18.
38. Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (2000). Micro-affordance of grasp type in a visual categorisation task. Visual Cognition. In press.
39. Ungerleider, L. G., & Mishbin, M. (1982). Two cortical visual systems. In Ingle, D. J., Goodale, M. A., & Mansfield, R. J. W. (Eds.), Analysis of Visual Behaviour (pp. 549-586). Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
40. Weeks, D. J., & Proctor, R. W. (1990). Salient-features coding in the translation between orthogonal stimulus and response dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 119, 355-366.