Action-induced effects on perception depend neither on element-level nor on set-level similarity between stimulus and response sets

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 73, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 1034-1041

  Wykowska, Agnieszka ^a   Hommel, Bernhard ^b   Schubö, Anna ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Goal directed movements; Perception and action; Visual search

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; HAND STRENGTH; HUMAN; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTENTION; CUES; DECISION MAKING; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); HAND STRENGTH; HUMANS; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; SIZE PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79955837153     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: 1943393X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-011-0122-x     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Anderson, S. J., & Yamagishi, N. (2000). Spatial localization of colour and luminance stimuli in human peripheral vision. Vision Research, 40, 759-771.
2. Band, G. P. H., van Steenbergen, H., Ridderinkhof, K. R., Falkenstein, M., & Hommel, B. (2009). Action-effect negativity: Irrelevant action effects are monitored like relevant feedback. Biological Psychology, 82, 211-218.
3. Bekkering, H., & Neggers, S. F. W. (2002). Visual search is modulated by action intentions. Psychological Science, 13, 370-374.
4. Bundesen, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97, 523-547.
5. Cousineau, D. (2005). Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus & Masson's method. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 1, 42-45.
6. Craighero, L., Fadiga, L., Rizzolatti, G., & Umiltà, C. A. (1999). Action for perception: A motor-visual attentional effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1673-1692.
7. Desimone, R., & Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18, 193-222.
8. Deubel, H., & Schneider, W. X. (1996). Saccade target selection and object recognition: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism. Vision Research, 36, 1827-1837.
9. Elsner, B., & Hommel, B. (2001). Effect anticipation and action control. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 27, 229-240.
10. Fagioli, S., Hommel, B., & Schubotz, R. I. (2007). Intentional control of attention: Action planning primes action related stimulus dimensions. Psychological Research, 71, 22-29.
11. Fitts, P. M., & Seeger, C. M. (1953). S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 199-210.
12. Graves, R. E. (1996). Luminance and colour effects on localization of briefly flashed visual stimuli. Visual Neuroscience, 13, 567-573.
13. Greenwald, A. (1970). Sensory feedback mechanisms in performance control: With special reference to the ideomotor mechanism. Psychological Review, 77, 73-99.
14. Hommel, B. (1993). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information. Psychological Research, 55, 270-279.
15. Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5, 183-216.
16. Hommel, B. (2009). Action control according to TEC (theory of event coding). Psychological Research, 73, 512-526.
17. Hommel, B. (2010). Grounding attention in action control: The intentional control of selection. In B. J. Bruya (Ed.), Effortless attention: A new perspective in the cognitive science of attention and action (pp. 121-140). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The Theory of Event Coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 849-937.
19. Humphreys, G. W., & Riddoch, M. J. (2001). Detection by action: Neuropsychological evidence for action-defined templates in search. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 84-89.
20. James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology (Vol. 2). New York, NY: Dover.
21. Jordan, J. S., & Hershberger, W. A. (1994). Timing the shift in retinal local signs that accompanies a saccadic eye movement. Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 657-666.
22. Jordan, J. S., & Hunsinger, M. (2008). Learned patterns of action-effect extrapolation contribute to the spatial displacement of continuously moving stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 34, 113-124.
23. Jordan, J. S., & Knoblich, G. (2004). Spatial perception and control. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 54-59.
24. Kerzel, D., Jordan, J. S., & Muesseler, J. (2001). The role of perceptual anticipation in the localization of the final position of a moving target. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 27, 829-840.
25. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis of stimulus-response compatibility-A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
26. Kornblum, S., Stevens, G., Whipple, A., & Requin, J. (1999). The effects of irrelevant stimuli I: The time course of S-S and S-R consistency effects with Stroop-like stimuli (DO Type 4 task), Simon-like tasks (DO Type 3 task), and their factorial combinations (DO Type 7 task). Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 25, 688-714.
27. Lotze, R. H. (1852). Medizinische Psychologie oder die Physiologie der Seele. Leipzig, Germany: Weidmann'sche Buchhandlung.
28. Memelink, J., & Hommel, B. (2005). Attention, instruction, and response representation. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 674-685.
29. Memelink, J., & Hommel, B. (2006). Tailoring perception and action to the task at hand. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 18, 579-592.
30. Morin, R. E., & Grant, D. A. (1955). Learning and performance on a keypressing task as a function of the degree of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49, 39-47.
31. Müller, H. J., Reimann, B., & Krummenacher, J. (2003). Visual search for singleton feature targets across dimensions: Stimulus- and expectancy-driven effects in dimensional weighting. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 29, 1021-1035.
32. Müsseler, J., & Hommel, B. (1997). Blindness to response-compatible stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 23, 861-872.
33. Prinz, W. (1987). Ideo-motor action. In H. Heuer & A. F. Sanders (Eds.), Perspectives on perception and action. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9, 129-154.
35. Prinz, W., Aschersleben, G.,& Koch, I. (2009). Cognition and action. In E. Morsella, J. A. Bargh,& P. M. Gollwitzer (Eds.), Oxford handbook of human action (pp. 35-71). Oxford, England: University Press.
36. Rosenbloom, P. S., & Newell, A. (1987). An integrated computational model of stimulus-response compatibility and practice. Psychology of Learning andMotivation, 21, 3-49.
37. Schubö, A., Prinz, W., & Aschersleben, G. (2004). Perceiving while acting: Action affects perception. Psychological Research, 68, 208-215.
38. Spironelli, C., Tagliabue, M., & Umiltà, C. (2009). Response selection and attention orienting: A computational model of Simon effect asymmetries. Experimental Psychology, 56, 274-282.
39. Tucker, R., & Ellis, M. (2001). The potentiation of grasp types during visual object categorization. Visual Cognition, 8, 769-800.
40. Wolfe, J. M., Butcher, S. J., Lee, C., & Hyle, M. (2003). Changing your mind: On the contributions of top-down and bottom-up guidance in visual search for feature singletons. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 29, 483-502.
41. Wolpert, D. M., & Ghahramani, Z. (2000). Computational principles of movement neuroscience. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 1212-1217.
42. Wykowska, A., Schubö, A., & Hommel, B. (2009). How you move is what you see: Action planning biases selection in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1755-1769.