From hand to eye: The role of literacy, familiarity, graspability, and vision-for-action on enantiomorphy

Acta Psychologica

Volumn 142, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 51-61

  Fernandes, Tânia ^a   Kolinsky, Régine ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PORTO   (Portugal)

^b UNIVERSITÉ LIBRE DE BRUXELLES   (Belgium)

^c Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique FNRS   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Enantiomorphy; Literacy acquisition; Vision for action; Vision for perception; Visual processing

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HAND STRENGTH; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RECOGNITION; VISION;

ADULT; AGED; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HAND STRENGTH; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); VISION, OCULAR; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84870914932     PISSN: 00016918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.11.008     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Baylis G.C., Driver J. Shape-coding in IT cells generalizes over contrast and mirror reversal, but not figure-ground reversal. Nature Neurosciences 2001, 4:937-942. 10.1038/nn0901-937.
2. Biederman I., Gerhardstein P.C. Recognizing depth rotated objects : Evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 1993, 19:1162-1182.
3. Bonin P., Peereman R., Malardier N., Méot A., Chalard M. A new set of 299 pictures for psycholinguistic studies: French norms for name agreement, image agreement, conceptual familiarity, visual complexity, age of acquisition, and naming latencies. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 2003, 35:158-167.
4. Cantlon J.F., Pinel P., Dehaene S., Pelphrey K.A. Cortical representations of symbols, objects, and faces are pruned back during early childhood. Cerebral Cortex 2011, 21:191-199. 10.1093/cercor/bhq078.
5. Cohen N.R., Cross E.S., Tunik E., Grafton S.T., Culham J.C. Ventral and dorsal stream contributions to the online control of immediate and delayed grasping: A TMS approach. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47:1553-1562. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.12.034.
6. Cohen L., Dehaene S., Naccache L., Lehéricy S., Dehaene-Lambertz G., Hénaff M.A., et al. The visual word form area: Spatial and temporal characterization of an initial stage of reading in normal and posterior split-brain patients. Brain 2000, 123:291-307.
7. Corballis M.C., Beale I.L. The psychology of left and right 1976, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
8. Creem S.H., Proffitt D.R. Defining the cortical visual systems: "What", "where", and "how". Acta Psychologica 2001, 107:43-68.
9. Crum R.M., Anthony J.C., Bassett S.S., Folstein M.F. Population-based norms for the mini-mental-state-examination by age and educational-level. Journal of the American Medical Association 1993, 269:2386-2391.
10. Danziger E., Pederson E. Through the looking-glass: Literacy, writing systems, and mirror-image discrimination. Written Language and Literacy 1998, 1:153-164.
11. Dehaene S., Cohen L. The unique role of the visual word form area in reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2011, 15:254-262. 10.1016/j.tics.2011.04.003.
12. Dehaene S., Nakamura K., Jobert A., Kuroki C., Ogawa S., Cohen L. Why do children make mirror errors in reading? Neural correlates of mirror invariance in the visual word form area. NeuroImage 2010, 49(2):1837-1848. 10.1016/.neuroimage2009.09.024.
13. Dehaene S., Pegado F., Braga L.W., Ventura P., Nunes G., Jobert A., et al. How learning to read changes the cortical networks for vision and language. Science 2010, 330:1359-1354. 10.1126/science.1194140.
14. Duñabeitia J.A., Molinaro N., Carreiras M. Through the looking-glass: Mirror reading. NeuroImage 2011, 54:3004-3009. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.10.079.
15. Folstein M.F., Folstein S., McHugh P.R. 'Mini-mental state': A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research 1975, 12:189-198.
16. Gibson E.J. Principles of perceptual learning and development 1969, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, NY.
17. Goodale M.A., Jakobson L.S., Keillor J.M. Differences in the visual control of pantomimed and natural grasping movements. Neuropsychologia 1994, 32:1159-1178. 10.1016/0028-3932(94)90100-7.
18. Goodale M.A., Milner A.D. Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends in Neurosciences 1992, 15:20-25. 10.1016/0166-2236(92)90344-8.
19. Gregory E., McCloskey M. Mirror-image confusions: Implications for representation and processing of objects orientation. Cognition 2010, 116:110-129. 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.04.005.
20. Gross C.G., Bornstein M.H. Left and right in science and art. Leonardo 1978, 11:29-38.
21. Guerreiro M., Silva A.P., Botelho M., Leitão O., Castro-Caldas A., Garcia C. Adaptação portuguesa da tradução do Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) [Adaptation to the Portuguese population of the translation of the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)]. Revista Portuguesa de Neurologia 1994, 1:9-10.
22. Howel D.C. Statistical methods for psychology 2010, Cengage Wadsworth, USA. 7th ed.
23. James K.H. Sensori-motor experience leads to changes in visual processing in the developing brain. Developmental Science 2011, 13:279-288. 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00883.x.
24. James T.W., Culham J., Humphreys G.H., Milner A.D., Goodale M.A. Ventral occipital lesions impair object recognition but not object-directed grasping: an fMRI study. Brain 2003, 126:2463-2475. 10.1093/brain/awg248.
25. Jeannerod M. The representing brain. Neural correlates of motor intention and imagery. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1994, 17:187-245.
26. Jeannerod M. The cognitive neuroscience of action 1997, Blackwell, Oxford.
27. Kolinsky R., Verhaeghe A., Fernandes T., Mengarda E.J., Grimm-Cabral L., Morais J. Enantiomorphy through the looking-glass: Literacy effects on mirror-image discrimination. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General 2011, 140(2):210-238. 10.1037/a0022168.
28. Lewis M.S., Bryman A., Liao T.F. The Sage Encyclopedia of social science research methods 2004, Sage Publications.
29. Logothetis N.K., Pauls J. Psychophysical and physiological evidence for viewer-centered object representations in the primate. Cerebral Cortex 1995, 5:270-288.
30. Logothetis N.K., Pauls J., Poggio T. Shape representation in the inferior temporal cortex of monkeys. Current Biology 1995, 5:552-563.
31. Longcamp M., Boucard C., Gilhodes J.-C., Anton J.-L., Roth M., Nazarian B., et al. Learning through hand- or typewriting influences visual recognition of new graphic shapes: Behavioral and functional imaging evidence. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2008, 20:802-815. 10.1162/jocn.2008.20504.
32. Masson M.E.J., Bub D.N., Breuer A.T. Priming of reach and grasp actions by handled objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 2011, 37:1470-1484. 10.1037/a0023509.
33. Milner A.D., Goodale M.A. Visual pathways to perception and action. Progress in Brain Research 1993, 95:317-337.
34. Milner A.D., Goodale M.A. Two visual systems reviewed. Neuropsychologia 2008, 46:774-785. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.10.005.
35. Murata A., Gallese V., Luppino G., Kaseda M., Sakata H. Selectivity for the shape, size, and orientation of objects for grasping in neurons of monkey parietal area AIP. Journal of Neurophysiology 2000, 83:2580-2601.
36. Pederson E. Mirror-image discrimination among nonliterates, monoliterate, and biliterate Tamil subjects. Written Language & Literacy 2003, 6:71-91. 10.1075/wll.6.1.04ped.
37. Pegado, F., Nakamura, K., Braga, L., Ventura, P., Nunes, G., Jobert, A., Morais, J., Cohen, L., Kolinsky, R., & Dehaene, S. (submitted for publication). Literacy breaks mirror invariance for visual stimuli: A behavioral study with adult illiterates.
38. Pegado F., Nakamura K., Cohen L., Dehaene S. Breaking the symmetry: Mirror discrimination for single letters but not for pictures in the Visual Word Form Area. NeuroImage 2011, 55(2):742-749. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.11.043.
39. Perea M., Moret-Tatay C., Panadero V. Suppression of mirror generalization for reversible letters: Evidence from masked priming. Journal of Memory and Language 2011, 3:237-246. 10.1016/j.jml.2011.04.005.
40. Rice N.J., Valyear K.F., Goodale M.A., Milner A.D., Culham J.C. Orientation sensitivity to graspable objects: An fMRI adaptation study. NeuroImage 2007, 36:T87-T93. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.03.032.
41. Rollenhagen J.E., Olson C.R. Mirror-Image Confusion in Single Neurons of the Macaque Inferotemporal Cortex. Science 2000, 287(5457):1506-1508. 10.1126/science.287.5457.1506.
42. Rossit S., Fraser J.A., Teasell R., Malhotra P.A., Goodale M.A. Impaired delayed but preserved immediate grasping in a neglect patient with parieto-occipital lesions. Neuropsychologia 2011, 49:2498-2504. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.04.030.
43. Snodgrass J.G., Vanderwart M. A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 1980, 6(2):174-215.
44. Szwed M., Ventura P., Querido L., Cohen L., Dehaene S. Reading acquisition enhances an early visual process of contour integration. Developmental Science 2012, 15:139-149. 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2011.01102.x.
45. Tarr M.J., Bülthoff H.H. Is human object recognition better described by geon structural descriptions or by multiple views? Comment on Biederman and Gerhardstein (1993). Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 1995, 21:1494-1505.
46. Tarr M.J., Pinker S. Mental rotation and orientation-dependent in shape recognition. Cognitive Psychology 1989, 21:233-282.
47. Tucker M., Ellis R. On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 1998, 24:830-846.
48. Turnbull O.H., Becshin E., DellaSala S. Agnosia for object orientation: Implications for theories of object recognition. Neuropsychologia 1997, 35:153-163.
49. Turnbull O.H., McCarthy R.A. When is a view unusual? A single case study of orientation-dependent visual agnosia. Brain Research Bulletin 1996, 40:497-502.
50. Valyear K.F., Culham J.C., Sharif N., Westwood D., Goodale M.A. A double dissociation between sensitivity to changes in object identity and object orientation in the ventral and dorsal visual streams: A human fMRI study. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44:218-228. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.05.004.
51. Ventura P. Normas para figuras do corpus de Snodgrass e Vanderwart (1980). Laboratório de Psicologia 2003, 1:5-19.