Simon-like and functional affordance effects with tools: The effects of object perceptual discrimination and object action state

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 63, Issue 11, 2010, Pages 2190-2201

  Pellicano, Antonello ^a   Iani, Cristina ^b   Borghi, Anna M ^a,c   Rubichi, Sandro ^b   Nicoletti, Roberto ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MODENA AND REGGIO EMILIA   (Italy)

^c INSTITUTE OF COGNITIVE SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGIES   (Italy)

Author keywords

Affordance; Functional affordance effect; Simon like effect; Spatial coding of tools

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MOTIVATION; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REACTION TIME; STUDENT; TASK PERFORMANCE;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; GOALS; HUMANS; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; SPACE PERCEPTION; STUDENTS; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 78149256620     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2010.486903     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Anderson, S. J., Yamagishi, N., & Karavia, V. (2002). Attentional processes link perception and action. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 269,1225-1232.
2. Ansorge, U. (2003). Spatial Simon effects and compatibility effects induced by observed gaze direction. Visual Cognition, 10, 363-383.
3. Bach, P., Peelen, M. V., & Tipper, S. P. (in press). On the role of object information in action observation: An fMRI study. Cerebral Cortex.
4. Blangero, A., Menz, M. M., McNamara, A., & Binkofski, F. (2009). Parietal modules for reaching. Neuropsychologia, 47, 1500-1507.
5. Borghi, A. M., & Riggio, L. (2009). Sentence comprehension and simulation of object temporary, canonical and stable affordances. Brain Research, 1253, 117-128.
6. Bub, D. N., Masson, M. E. J., & Cree, G. S. (2008). Evocation of functional and volumetric gestural knowledge by objects and words. Cognition, 106, 27-58.
7. Buxbaum, L. J., Sirigu, A., Schwartz, M. F., & Klatzky, R. (2003). Cognitive representations of hand posture in ideomotor apraxia. Neuropsychologia, 41, 1091-1113.
8. Cho, D., & Proctor, R. W. (in press). The object-based Simon effect: Grasping affordance or relative location of the graspable part? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.
9. Creem-Regehr, S. H., & Lee, J. N. (2005). Neural representations of graspable objects: Are tools special? Cognitive Brain Research, 22, 457-469.
10. Decety, J., & Grèzes, J. (2006). The power of simulation: Imagining one's own and other's behavior. Brain Research, 1079, 4-14.
11. Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (2000). Micro-affordance: The potentiation of components of action by seen objects. British Journal of Psychology, 9, 451-471.
12. Gallese, V. (2009). Motor abstraction: A neuroscientific account of how action goals and intentions are mapped and understood. Psychological Research, 73, 486-498.
13. Gallese, V., & Goldman, A. (1998). Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind-reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 493-501.
14. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
15. Iani, C., Baroni, G., Pellicano, A., & Nicoletti, R. (in press). On the relationship between affordance and Simon effects: Are the effects really independent? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology.
16. Jeannerod, M. (1997). The cognitive neuroscience of action. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
17. Jeannerod, M. (2007). Motor cognition. What actions tell the self. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
18. Jeannerod, M., Decety, J., & Michel, F. (1994). Impairment of grasping movements following a bilateral posterior parietal lesion. Neuropsychologia, 32,369-380.
19. Johnson-Frey, S. H. (2003). Cortical representations of human tool use. In S.H. Johnson-Frey (Ed.), Taking action: Cognitive neuroscience perspectives on intentional acts (pp. 185-217). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. Kellenbach, M. L., Brett, M., & Patterson, K. (2003). The importance of manipulability and action in tool representation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 30-46.
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. Loach, D., Frischen, A., Bruce, N., & Tsotsos, J. K. (2008). An attentional mechanism for selecting appropriate actions afforded by graspable objects. Psychological Science, 19, 1253-1257.
23. Martin, A. (2007). The representation of object concepts in the brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 25-45.
24. Masaki, H., Takasawa, N., & Yamazaki, K. (2000). An electrophysiological study of the locus of the interference effect in a stimulus-response compatibility paradigm. Psychophysiology, 37, 464-472.
25. Michaels, C. F. (1988). S-R compatibility between response position and destination of apparent motion: Evidence of the detection of affordances. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 231-240.
26. Michaels, C. F. (1993). Destination compatibility, affordances and coding rules: A reply to Proctor, van Zandt, Lu, & Weeks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 1121-1127.
27. Pellicano, A., Lugli, L., Baroni, G., & Nicoletti, R. (2009). The Simon effect with conventional signals: A time-course analysis. Experimental Psychology, 56, 219-227.
28. Phillips, J., & Ward, R. (2002). S-R correspondence effects of irrelevant visual affordance: Time-course and specificity of response activation. Visual Cognition, 9, 540-558.
29. Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P.L. (2006). Stimulus-response compatibility principle: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.
30. Ratcliff, R. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446-461.
31. Ricciardelli, P., Bonfiglioli, C., Iani, C., Rubichi, S., & Nicoletti, R. (2007). Spatial coding and central patterns: Is there something special about the eyes? Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 79-90.
32. Riggio, L., Iani, C., Gherri, E., Benatti, F., Rubichi, S., & Nicoletti, R. (2008). The role of attention in the occurrence of the affordance effect. Acta Psychologica, 127, 449-458.
33. Rizzolatti, G., & Matelli, M. (2003). Two different streams form the dorsal visual system: Anatomy and functions. Experimental Brain Research, 153, 146-157.
34. Simon, J. R., & Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S-R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300-304.
35. Stahl, C. (2006). Software for generating psychological experiments. Experimental Psychology, 53, 218-232.
36. Symes, E., Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (2005). Dissociating object-based and space-based affordances. Visual Cognition, 12, 1337-1361.
37. Tipper, S. P., Paul, M., & Hayes, A. (2006). Vision-foraction: The effects of object property discrimination and action state on affordance compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 493-498.
38. 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.
39. Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (2001). The potentiation of grasp types during visual object categorization. Visual Cognition, 8, 769-800.
40. Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (2004). Action priming by briefly presented objects. Acta Psychologica, 116, 185-203.
41. Vainio, L., Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (2007). The role of visuospatial attention in action priming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 241-261.
42. Young, G. (2006). Are different affordances subserved by different neural pathways? Brain & Cognition, 62,134-142.