Vision-for-perception and vision-for-action: Which model is compatible with the available psychophysical and neuropsychological data?

Vision Research

Volumn 51, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 812-818

  Schenk, Thomas ^a   Franz, Volker ^b   Bruno, Nicola ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ERLANGEN   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HAMBURG   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PARMA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Action; Grasping; Illusion; Neuropsychology; Perception; Psychophysics

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; NEUROPSYCHOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; SENSORIMOTOR FUNCTION; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISION; VISUAL ILLUSION; VISUAL INFORMATION; VISUAL STIMULATION;

HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MODELS, THEORETICAL; MOTOR ACTIVITY; NEUROPSYCHOLOGY; OPTICAL ILLUSIONS; VISUAL PATHWAYS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 79954529003     PISSN: 00426989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2011.02.003     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Aglioti S., DeSouza J.F.X., Goodale M.A. Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Current Biology 1995, 5:679-685.
2. Bruno N., Bernardis P., Gentilucci M. Visually guided pointing, the Müller-Lyer illusion, and the functional interpretation of the dorsal-ventral split: Conclusions from 33 independent studies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 2008, 32:423-437.
3. Bruno N., Franz V. When is grasping affected by the Müller-Lyer illusion? A quantitative review. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47:1421-1433.
4. Bruno N., Knox P.V., de Grave D.D. A metanalysis of the effect of the Mueller-Lyer illusion on saccadic eye movements: No general support for a dissociation of perception and oculomotor action. Vision Research 2010, 50:2671-2682.
5. Cohen J. The earth is round (p<.05). American Psychologist 1994, 49:997-1003.
6. Dennett D. Consciousness explained 1991, Penguin Press, London.
7. Dewar M.T., Carey D.P. Visuomotor 'immunity' to perceptual illusion: A mismatch of attentional demands cannot explain the perception-action dissociation. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44:1501-1508.
8. Dosher B.A., Sperling G., Wurst S.A. Tradeoffs between stereopsis and proximity luminance covariance as determinants of perceived 3D structure. Vision Research 1986, 26:973-990.
9. Faugier-Grimaud S., Frenois C., Stein D.G. Effects of posterior parietal lesions on visually guided behavior in monkeys. Neuropsychologia 1978, 16:151-168.
10. Franz V.H. Manual size estimation: A neuropsychological measure of perception?. Experimental Brain Research 2003, 151:471-477.
11. Franz, V. H. (2010). Grasping, memory, and illusions: Can we find differences between dorsal and ventral control? (Talk presented at the workshop: "Perception and action", May 30 June 4, 2010 Rauischholzhausen Castle, Germany) (June 2).
12. Franz V.H., Fahle M., Bülthoff H.H., Gegenfurtner K.R. Effects of visual illusions on grasping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2001, 27:1124-1144.
13. Franz V., Gegenfurtner K. Grasping visual illusions: Consistent data and no dissociation. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2008, 25:920-950.
14. Franz V.H., Gegenfurtner K.R., Bülthoff H.H., Fahle M. Grasping visual illusions: No evidence for a dissociation between perception and action. Psychological Science 2000, 11:20-25.
15. Franz V.H., Hesse C., Kollath S. Visual illusions, delayed grasping, and memory: No shift from dorsal to ventral control. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47:1518-1531.
16. Ganel T., Chajut E., Algom D. Visual coding for action violates fundamental psychophysical principles. Current Biology 2008, 18:R599-R601.
17. Ganel T., Chajut E., Tanzer M., Algom D. Response: When does grasping escape Weber's law?. Current Biology 2008, 18:R1090-R1091.
18. Ganel T., Tanzer M., Goodale M.A. A double dissociation between action and perception in the context of visual illusions - Opposite effects of real and illusory size. Psychological Science 2008, 19:221-225.
19. Gigerenzer G. The superego, the ego, and the id in statistical reasoning. A Handbook for Data Analysis in the Behavioral Sciences: Methodological Issues 1993, 310-339. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. G. Keren, C. Lewis (Eds.).
20. Glover S., Dixon P. Dynamic effects of the Ebbinghaus Illusion in grasping: Support for a planning/control model of action. Perception & Psychophysics 2002, 64:266-278.
21. Goodale M.A., Milner A.D., Jakobson L.S., Carey D.P. A neurological dissociation between perceiving objects and grasping them. Nature 1991, 349:154-156.
22. Goodale M.A., Milner A.D. Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends in Neurosciences 1992, 15:97-112.
23. Haaxma R., Kuypers H.G.J.M. Intrahemispheric cortical connexions and visual guidance of hand and finger movements in the rhesus monkey. Brain 1975, 98:239-260.
24. Haffenden A.M., Goodale M.A. The effect of pictorial illusion on prehension and perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1998, 10:122-136.
25. Haffenden A.M., Schiff K.C., Goodale M.A. The dissociation between perception and action in the Ebbinghaus illusion: Nonillusory effects of pictorial cues on grasp. Current Biology 2001, 11:177-181.
26. Hu Y., Goodale M.A. Grasping after a delay shifts size-scaling from absolute to relative metrics. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2000, 12:856-868.
27. Husain M., Nachev P. Space and the parietal cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2006, 11:30-36.
28. Hyvärinen J., Poranen P. Function of the parietal associative area 7 as revealed from cellular discharges in alert monkeys. Brain 1974, 97:673-692.
29. Jeannerod M. Intersegmental coordination during reaching at natural visual objects. Attention and Performance. Vol. 9 1981, 153-168. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey. J. Long, A. Baddeley (Eds.).
30. Kline R.B. Beyond significance testing: Reforming data analysis methods in behavioral research 2004, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
31. Loftus G.R. Psychology will be a much better science when we change the way we analyze data. Current Directions in Psychological Science 1996, 5:161-171.
32. McIntosh R.D., Lashley G. Matching boxes: Familiar size influences action programming. Neuropsychologia 2008, 46:2441-2444.
33. Meehl P.E. Theory testing in psychology and in physics: A methodological paradox. Philosophy of Science 1967, 34:103-115.
34. Milner A.D., Goodale M.A. The visual brain in action 1995, Oxford Press, Oxford.
35. Milner A.D., Goodale M.A. The visual brain in action 2006, Oxford University Press, Oxford. 2 ed.
36. Milner A.D., Goodale M.A. Two visual systems re-viewed. Neuropsychologia 2008, 46:774-785.
37. Milner A.D., Perrett D.I., Johnston R.S., Benson P.J., Jordan T.R., Heeley D.W., et al. Perception and action in 'visual form agnosia'. Brain 1991, 114:405-428.
38. Mountcastle V.B., Lynch J.C., Georgopoulos A.P., Sakata H., Acuña C. Posterior parietal association cortex of the monkey: command function of operations within extrapersonal space. Journal of Neurophysiology 1975, 38:871-908.
39. Murray S.O., Boyaci H., Kersten D. The representation of perceived angular size in human primary visual cortex. Nature Neuroscience 2006, 9:429-434.
40. Nelissen K., Joly O., Durand J.B., Todd J.T., Vanduffel W., Orban G.A. The extraction of depth structure from shading and texture in the macaque brain. PLoS One 2009, 4(12):e8306.
41. Norman J. Two visual systems and two theories of perception: An attempt to reconcile the constructivist and ecological approaches. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2002, 25:73-96.
42. Orban, G. A. (forthcoming). The extraction of 3D Shape in the Primate Brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 34.
43. Pavani F., Boscagli I., Benvenuti F., Rabuffetti M., Farnc A. Are perception and action affected differently by the Titchener circles illusion?. Experimental Brain Research 1999, 127:95-101.
44. Pisella L., Binkofski F., Lasek K., Toni I., Rossetti Y. No double-dissociation between optic ataxia and visual agnosia: Multiple sub-streams for multiple visuo-manual integrations. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44:2734-2748.
45. Rice N.J., McIntosh R.D., Schindler I., Démonet J.-F., Milner A.D. Automatic avoidance of obstacles in patients with visual form agnosia. Experimental Brain Research 2006, 174:176-188.
46. Rizzolatti G., Matelli M. Two different streams form the dorsal visual system: Anatomy and functions. Experimental Brain Research 2003, 153:146-157.
47. Rondot P., De Recondo J., Ribadeau Dumas J.L. Visuomotor ataxia. Brain 1977, 100:335-376.
48. Schenk T. An allocentric rather than perceptual deficit in patient DF. Nature Neuroscience 2006, 9:1345-1457.
49. Schenk T. Visuomotor robustness is based on integration not segregation. Vision Research 2010, 50:2627-2632.
50. Schenk T., McIntosh R.D. Do we have independent visual streams for perception and action?. Cognitive Neuroscience 2010, 1:52-61.
51. Schenk T., Milner A.D. Concurrent visuomotor behaviour improves form discrimination in a patient with visual form agnosia. European Journal of Neuroscience 2006, 24:1495-1503.
52. Smeets J.B.J., Brenner E. Perception and action are based on the same visual information - Distinction between position and velocity. Journal of Experimental Psychology - Human Perception and Performance 1995, 21:19-31.
53. Smeets J.B., Brenner E. A new view on grasping. Motor Control 1999, 3:237-271.
54. Smeets J.B.J., Brenner E. 10 Years of illusions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2006, 32:1501-1504.
55. Stein J. Effects of parietal lobe cooling on manipulative behaviour in the monkey. Active Touch 1978, 79-90. Pergamon Press, Oxford. G. Gordon (Ed.).
56. Westwood, D. A., & Goodale, M. A. (this issue). Converging evidence for diverging pathways: neuropsychology and psychophysics tell the same story. Vision Research.
57. Westwood D.A., Goodale M.A. Perceptual illusion and the real-time control of action. Spatial Vision 2003, 16:243-254.
58. Westwood D.A., McEachern T., Roy E.A. Delayed grasping of a Müller-Lyer figure. Experimental Brain Research 2001, 141:166-173.