Actual and illusory differences in constant speed influence the perception of animacy similarly

Journal of Vision

Volumn 7, Issue 12, 2007, Pages

  Szego, Paul A ^a,b   Rutherford, M D ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b NONE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Animate motion; Illusory perceptions; Motion perception; Social cognition

Indexed keywords

ACCELERATION; ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; COGNITION; FEMALE; HUMAN; LIFE; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; PERCEPTION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; VISUAL ILLUSION;

ACCELERATION; ADULT; COGNITION; CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIFE; MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MOTION PERCEPTION; OPTICAL ILLUSIONS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; SOCIAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 34548720343     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15347362     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/7.12.5     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Barrett, H. C. (2005). Adaptations to predators and prey. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 200-223). New York: Wiley & Sons, Inc.
2. Barrett, H. C., Todd, P. M., Miller, G., F., & Blythe, P. W. (2005). Accurate judgments of intention from motion cues alone: A cross-cultural study. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 313-331.
3. Blalock, H. M. (1972). Social statistics (Second ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
4. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 443-446. [PubMed]
5. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (1st ed., pp. 163-228). New York: Oxford University Press.
6. Csibra, G., Gergely, G., Bíró, S., Koós, O., & Brockbank, M. (1999). Goal attribution without agency cues: The perception of 'pure reason' in infancy. Cognition, 72, 237-267. [PubMed]
7. Dunbar, R. A. (1998). The social brain hypothesis. Evolutionary Anthropology, 6(5), 178-190.
8. Gelman, S. A., & Opfer, J. E. (2002). Development of the animate-inanimate distinction. In U. Goswami (Ed.), Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development (pp. 151-166). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
9. Gergely, G., Nádasdy, Z., Csibra, G., & Bíró, S. (1995). Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age. Cognition, 56, 165-193. [PubMed]
10. Giese, M. A., & Poggio, T. (2003). Neural mechanisms or the recognition of biological movements. Nature Reviews, Neuroscience, 4, 179-192. [PubMed]
11. Guajardo, J. J., & Woodward, A. L. (2004). Is agency skin deep? Surface attributes influence infants' sensitivity to goal-directed action. Infancy, 6, 361-384.
12. Haffenden, A. M., Schiff, K. C., & Goodale, M. A. (2001). The dissociation between perception and action in the Ebbinghaus illusion: Nonillusory effects of pictorial cues on grasp. Current Biology, 11, 177-181. [PubMed][Article]
13. Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944). An experimental study of apparent motion. American Journal of Psychology, 57, 243-259.
14. Kuhlmeier, V., Wynn, K., & Bloom, P. (2003). Attribution of dispositional states by 12-month-olds. Psychological Science, 14, 402-408. [PubMed]
15. Leslie, A. M. (1994). Tomm, toby, and agency: Core architecture and domain specificity. In L. Hirschfeld, A., & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 119-148). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Luo, Y., & Baillargeon, R. (2005). Can a self-propelled box have a goal? Psychological reasoning in 5-month-old infants. Psychological Science, 16, 601-608. [PubMed]
17. Martin, A., & Weisberg, J. (2003). Neural foundations for understanding social and mechanical concepts. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 575-587. [PubMed] [Article]
18. Mondloch, C. J., Lewis, T. L., Budreau, D. R., Maurer, D., Dannemiller, J. L., Stephens, B. R., et al. (1999). Face perception during early infancy. Psychological Science, 10, 419-422.
19. Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437-442. [PubMed]
20. Premack, D. (1990). The infant's theory of self-propelled objects. Cognition, 36, 1-16. [PubMed]
21. Premack, D., & Premack, A. J. (1995). Intention as psychological cause. In D. Sperber, D. Premack, & A. J. Premack (Eds.), Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate (pp. 185-199). New York: Oxford University Press.
22. Rakison, D. H., & Poulin-Dubois, D. (2001). Developmental origin of the animate-inanimate distinction. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 209-228. [PubMed]
23. Rochat, P., Morgan, R., & Carpenter, M. (1997). Young infants' sensitivity to movement information specifying social causality. Cognitive Development, 12, 537-561.
24. Rutherford, M. D., Pennington, B. F., & Rogers, S. J. (2006). The perception of animacy in young children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36, 983-992 [PubMed]
25. Scholl, B. J., & Tremoulet, P. D. (2000). Perceptual causality and animacy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 299-309. [PubMed]
26. Tremoulet, P. D., & Feldman, J. (2000). Perception of animacy from the motion of a single object. Perception, 29, 943-951. [PubMed]
27. Woodward, A. L. (1998). Infants selectively encode the goal object of an actor's reach. Cognition, 69, 1-34. [PubMed]