Action-specific Account Of Perception Research Articles

Priming With Childhood Constructs Influences Distance Perception.

The aim of our study was to examine whether priming adults with childhood constructs changes distance perception. Two alternative hypotheses could be derived: (1) The fundamental reference approach in visual perception of sizes and distances predicts that priming with childhood constructs should enlarge perceived distance (the world should be larger to a small observer); (2) and, conversely, the action-specific account of perception predicts that priming with childhood constructs should make distances seem shorter (a more physically active child should underestimate distances as more attainable). The results consistently support the second theory. Experiment 1 showed that being either explicitly or implicitly primed with childhood constructs decreased perceptions of distance as compared to that evaluated in the control groups. This effect was noticeable for long distances and only marginally significant for short distances. Also, this effect was not mediated by mood. Experiment 2 replicated the result of explicit priming with an additional control condition (baseline). The effect remained significant after controlling for the participants’ evaluation of their childhood memories, tendency to relive memories from their childhood, having children, having a driver’s license, and the participants’ height.

Human and machine: Evaluating whether action automation influences visual perception.

The action-specific account of perception suggests that our perceptual system is influenced by information about our ability to act in our environment and, thus, affects our perception. However, the specific information about action that is influential for perception is still largely unknown. For example, if a goal is achieved through automation rather than action, is perception influenced because the goal was achieved or is perception immune because the act was automated rather than performed by the observer? In four experiments, we examined whether automating a paddle to block a moving ball in a computer game similar to Pong affects perception of the ball's speed. Results indicate that the automation used here did not affect speed perception of the target. Whereas tools such as reach-extending sticks and various-sized paddles are both incorporated into one's body schema and also influence spatial perception, automation, our results imply that automation is not incorporated into one's body schema and does not affect spatial perception. The dissociation in how the mind treats tools versus automation could have several implications as automation becomes more prevalent in daily life.

Updating Perception and Action Across Real-World Viewpoint Changes

According to the action-specific account of perception, performing actions can distort our visual perception of the world. For example, using a reach-extending tool leads people to underestimate the distances to objects. Unlike many real-world situations, these action-specific distortions have largely been studied under stationary viewing conditions. Here, we tested whether these distortions persist when observers move to new viewpoints. Participants stood at one end of a table and viewed as an object was projected onto the table. Participants reached for the object with their index finger or a metal baton, and touched the object if it was within reach. Although all objects were beyond reach of participants’ index finger, all objects were within reach of the baton. After reaching for the object, participants stood in place or moved to a new viewpoint, then estimated the object’s distance from their current viewpoint. In our first two experiments, when participants stood in place, using a tool led them to report shorter distance estimates. However, when participants moved to a new viewpoint, using a tool did not influence their distance estimates. Thus, action-specific distortions did not persist when observers moved to new viewpoints. In our next three experiments, we tested whether these distortions persist when observers produce other types of movement. Specifically, participants rotated in place, took a step backward, or simply walked in place. In all three experiments, using a tool did not influence participants’ distance estimates. Thus, the present findings were not simply due to changes in viewpoint, and could be observed when participants only received sensorimotor feedback from movement. Together, these findings suggest that action-specific distortions may not be as persistent as many theoretical accounts assume. Indeed, because observers are often free to move and observe objects from multiple viewpoints, these distortions may not be observed in many real-world situations.

The differential effects of task difficulty on the perception of passing distance and subsequent passing action in a field hockey push pass task

The aims of the study were to initially investigate whether the perceived distance of a field hockey push pass task was influenced by manipulating task difficulty (Experiment 1), and further, expanding on the research, whether perceptual biases would translate into the execution of a corresponding push pass action (Experiment 2). Based on predictions from the two-visual systems model, we hypothesized that the action-specific perceptual biases in distance perception would not translate into the control of movement. In Experiment 1, elite field hockey players estimated the distance from targets that differed in size before making push pass actions toward the target (i.e., the smaller targets being more difficult). Results showed that participants did estimate the perceived distance of the push pass task to be larger as a function of task difficulty. We found a similar result in Experiment 2, and in addition, manipulated the required outcome of the push-pass while measuring the speed of the push-pass and found that a perceptual bias did not translate into the execution of the actual push pass task (Experiment 2). In line with the action-specific account of perception, a perceptual bias arose that may assist in making adaptive action choices. However, consistent with the two-visual systems model, this perceptual bias did not affect subsequent control of movement, preventing it from becoming maladaptive. Implications for talent identification and development are briefly discussed.

Magnitude estimation is influenced by social power

The action-specific perception account suggests that how people perceive the environment depends on their ability to act on it, assuming that estimation is influenced by inter-individual traits, but also by situated states. Moreover, several studies revealed that social power affects basic cognitive processes and even influences the way we perceive the physical environment. In the present study, we examined whether social power also influences estimation performance of spatial magnitudes (i.e., line estimation). Participants estimated the line length of a given number in an increase and a decrease condition, after (low versus high) social power had been manipulated between participants via role assignment. In the increase condition, low-power participants overestimated line lengths, whereas such a bias was not observed for high-power participants. In contrast, the power manipulation did not affect performance in the decrease condition, suggesting that proportion-judgement strategies might have been applied here, thereby reducing the overall bias in line estimations. Our findings support the notion that social power has an impact on the perception of the physical environment and that perception can depend on personal as well as situational factors. Moreover, the present research suggests that high (compared to low) social power may help people to overcome biases in overestimating magnitudes.

A role for control in an action-specific effect on perception.

According to the action-specific account of perception, people perceive the spatial layout of the environment in relation to their ability to act. Pioneering research by Bhalla and Proffitt (1999) demonstrated that hills were judged as steeper to perceivers with less physiological potential. Since this seminal work, much research has shown these action-specific effects generalize beyond hill slant perception and beyond physiological potential, but the underlying mechanisms are underspecified. The present experiments explore the potential mechanism that information about action is integrated with visual information about the target. According to an integration account, information from various sources are weighted, and the strength of these weights dictates the strength of that source of information on the resulting percept. One prediction is that it should be possible to vary the strength of the weights and thereby vary the size of a particular effect. To reduce the effect of action on perception, control over the action was taken away from participants. As predicted, losing control reduced the impact of action on spatial perception. This is the first reported instance of a partial action-specific effect, and is consistent with an integration-based mechanism. (PsycINFO Database Record

Big Five group differences between academic majors: a systematic review

Action abilities are constrained by physical body size and characteristics, which, according to the action-specific account of perception, should influence perceived space. We examined whether physical body size or beliefs about body size affect distance perception by taking advantage of naturally-occurring dissociations typical in people who are obese but believe themselves to weigh less. Normal weight, overweight, and obese individuals made verbal distance estimates. We also collected measures of beliefs about body size and measures of physical body size. Individuals who weighed more than others estimated distances to be farther. Furthermore, physical body weight influenced perceived distance but beliefs about body size did not. The results illustrate that whereas perception is influenced by physical characteristics, it is not influenced by beliefs. The results also have implications for perception as a contributing factor for lifestyle choices: people who weigh more than others may choose to perform less physically demanding actions not as a result of how they perceive their bodies, but as a result of how they perceive the environment.

Action-specific judgment, not perception: Fitts' law performance is related to estimates of target width only when participants are given a performance score.

Proponents of the action-specific account of perception and action posit that participants perceive their environment relative to their capabilities. For example, softball players who batted well judge the ball as being larger compared to players who did not hit as well. In the present study, we examined this issue in the context of a well-known speed-accuracy movement task that can be examined in the laboratory, repetitive Fitts aiming. In the Fitts task, a performer moved as quickly and as accurately as possible between two targets, D units of distance apart (between 2.5 and 20.0cm) and of W width (1.0cm or less). In the Fitts task, we posited that individuals do not have access to performance quality. Thus, we asked whether individual differences in Fitts task performance was related to perception of target width. If Fitts task performance is related to perception of target width, then the action-specific effect on perception does not require explicit knowledge of performance and, furthermore, these effects reside during on-line visual control of the task. We show that only when subjects were provided with a performance score was there a relation between Fitts task performance and target width judgment error. We interpret this result to mean that action-specific effects do not occur during perceptual processing of the task, but action-specific effects are the result of postperformance evaluation processes.

Perceived distance and obesity: It's what you weigh, not what you think

Action abilities are constrained by physical body size and characteristics, which, according to the action-specific account of perception, should influence perceived space. We examined whether physical body size or beliefs about body size affect distance perception by taking advantage of naturally-occurring dissociations typical in people who are obese but believe themselves to weigh less. Normal weight, overweight, and obese individuals made verbal distance estimates. We also collected measures of beliefs about body size and measures of physical body size. Individuals who weighed more than others estimated distances to be farther. Furthermore, physical body weight influenced perceived distance but beliefs about body size did not. The results illustrate that whereas perception is influenced by physical characteristics, it is not influenced by beliefs. The results also have implications for perception as a contributing factor for lifestyle choices: people who weigh more than others may choose to perform less physically demanding actions not as a result of how they perceive their bodies, but as a result of how they perceive the environment.

Action-specific perception of speed is independent of attention.

According to the action-specific account of perception, a perceiver's ability to act influences how the environment is perceived. For example, in a computer-based task, participants perceive fish as moving faster when they use a smaller net, and are thus less effective at catching the fish (Witt & Sugovic, 2013a). Here, we examined the degree to which attention may influence perceptual judgments by requiring participants to engage in a secondary task that directed their attention either toward (Exp. 1) or away from (Exp. 2) the to-be-caught fish. Though perceived fish speed was influenced by participants' catching performance-replicating previous results-attentional allocation did not impact this relationship between catching performance and perceived fish speed. The present results suggest that action directly influences spatial perception, rather than exerting indirect effects via attentional processes.

Awareness Is Not a Necessary Characteristic of a Perceptual Effect

Golf holes look larger to golfers who are playing better than others, and hills look steeper to people who are fatigued from a long run—or so claims the action-specific account of perception. According to this account, spatial perception of slant, distance, and size is influenced by the perceiver’s ability to perform actions such as walking, throwing, or grasping. This claim is based on empirical findings that observers report hills as steeper, distances as farther, and objects as smaller when they are less capable of acting on the objects. Recently, Firestone (2013) challenged the claim that these reports reflect genuine differences in perception. One argument he levied against a perceptual interpretation is that people are not aware of these perceptual differences related to action, and they should be. Here, I argue that awareness is not a necessary condition for an effect to be perceptual, as evidenced by a lack of awareness in the case of a classic visual illusion. However, to make a strong claim for genuine effects in perception, the action-specific account must specify a perceptual mechanism, and it has yet to do so.

Discovering your inner Gibson: Reconciling action-specific and ecological approaches to perception–action

Both the action-specific perception account and the ecological approach to perception-action emphasize the role of action in perception. However, the action-specific perception account demonstrates that different percepts are possible depending on the perceiver's ability to act, even when the same optical information is available. These findings challenge one of the fundamental claims of the ecological approach--that perception is direct--by suggesting that perception is mediated by internal processes. Here, we sought to resolve this apparent discrepancy. We contend that perception is based on the controlled detection of the information available in a global array that includes higher-order patterns defined across interoceptive and exteroceptive stimulus arrays. These higher-order patterns specify the environment in relation to the perceiver, so direct sensitivity to them would be consistent with the ecological claims that perception of the environment is direct and animal-specific. In addition, the action-specific approach provides further evidence for the theory of affordances, by demonstrating that even seemingly abstract properties of the environment, such as distance and size, are ultimately perceived in terms of an agent's action capabilities.

Catching ease influences perceived speed: Evidence for action-specific effects from action-based measures

According to the action-specific account of perception, people perceive the environment in terms of their ability to act. Here, we directly tested this claim by using an action-based measure of perceived speed: Participants attempted to catch a virtual fish by releasing a virtual net. The net varied in size, making the task easier or harder. We measured perceived speed by using explicit judgment-based measures and an action-based measure (time to release the net). Participants released the net later when playing with the big as compared with the small net, indicating that the fish looked to be moving more slowly when participants played with the big net. Explicit judgments of fish speed were similarly influenced by net size. These results provide converging evidence from both explicit and action-based measures that a perceiver's ability to act influences a common underlying process, most likely perceived speed, rather than postperceptual processes such as response formation.

An older view on distance perception: older adults perceive walkable extents as farther

According to the action-specific perception account, spatial perception is affected by the specific energetic costs required to perform an action. In the current experiments, we examined the effect of age on distance perception. Older and younger adults were asked to verbally estimate distance to a target placed in a hallway. Results showed that older adults estimated distances to be farther compared to younger adults. Additionally, older and younger adults estimated distances on a surface that was easier to walk on (carpet) and on a surface that was more difficult to walk on (carpet covered by a plastic tarp). For older adults, distances looked farther on the plastic surface than on the carpet. These differences across surfaces were not found for able, younger adults. These results suggest that the type of floor surface available influences perception of distances. Furthermore, the results suggest that perception is still sensitive to environmental differences that affect ability even as a perceiver ages.

Response Bias Cannot Explain Action-Specific Effects: Evidence from Compliant and Non-Compliant Participants

According to the action-specific account of perception, the perceiver's ability to act influences perception of the target. For example, targets that are easier to acquire are reported to look closer, bigger, and slower. However, an alternative explanation for these effects is that they are due to response bias, rather than to changes in perception. To test the role of response bias, we employed two separate manipulations. We manipulated people's abilities to block a ball and measured the corresponding effects on estimated ball speed. We also created an explicit task demand by giving participants instructions that emphasized responding either slow or fast. Participants were grouped, based on whether they were compliant or non-compliant with the instructions. Regardless of their compliance, we found an action-specific effect of blocking ability on estimated speed. Given that non-compliant participants still showed the effect, the results provide strong evidence against a response-bias explanation of this action-specific effect. Paired with earlier research, we conclude that blocking ability influences perceived speed. Perception expresses the relationship between the environment and the perceiver, and this view is consistent with emerging neural and behavioral evidence for an interconnected perceptual-motor system.

Does action affect perception or memory?

Current literature maintains that success or failure in the performance of an action can modify perception of the objects of that action. The tests of that modification, however, may have measured memory rather than perception. To address this issue, the current experiment had observers throw a marble into various sized holes and assess their size through either a haptic or verbal measure. They respond either before the throw while the hole is visible (control condition), after the throw while the hole is visible (perception condition), or after the throw while the hole is not visible (memory condition). It was found that observers judged the hole size to be different depending on their throwing success only during the memory condition. This casts doubt on the conclusion of an action-specific perception account (Witt, 2011), and instead we propose an action-specific memory account.

Compressing perceived distance with remote tool-use: Real, imagined, and remembered.

Reaching for an object with a tool has been shown to cause a compressed perception of space just beyond arm's reach. It is not known, however, whether tools that have distal, detached effects at far distances can cause this same perceptual distortion. We examined this issue in the current study with targets placed up to 30m away. Participants who illuminated targets with a laser pointer or imagined doing so consistently judged the targets to be closer than those who pointed at the targets with a baton. Furthermore, perceptual distortions that arose from tool-use persisted in memory beyond the moment of interaction. These findings indicate that remote interactions can have the same perceptual consequences as physical interactions, and have implications for an action-specific account of perception.

Does ease to block a ball affect perceived ball speed? Examination of alternative hypotheses.

According to an action-specific account of perception, the perceived speed of a ball can be a function of the ease to block the ball. Balls that are easier to stop look like they are moving slower than balls that are more difficult to stop. This was recently demonstrated with a modified version of the classic computer game Pong (Witt & Sugovic, 2010). However, alternative explanations can also explain these results without resorting to nonoptical effects on perception. To examine whether blocking ease influences perception, we conducted several experiments. We examined whether the apparent effects were due to the type of perceptual judgment, the timing of the judgment, and the effectiveness of the paddle. The results are consistent with a perceptual explanation, and help build a case that blocking ease can influence perceived speed.

Action-specific effects in a social context: Others' abilities influence perceived speed.

According to the action-specific account of perception, perceivers see the environment relative to their ability to perform the intended action. For example, in a modified version of the computer game Pong, balls that were easier to block looked to be moving slower than balls that were more difficult to block (Witt & Sugovic, 2010). It is unknown, however, if perception can be influenced by another person's abilities. In the current experiment, we examined whether another person's ability to block a ball influenced the observer's perception of ball speed. Participants played and observed others play the modified version of Pong where the task was to successfully block the ball with paddles that varied in size, and both the actor and observer estimated the speed of the ball. The results showed that both judged the ball to be moving faster when it was harder to block. However, the same effect of difficulty on speed estimates was not found when observers watched a computer play, suggesting the effect is specific to people and not to the task. These studies suggest that the environment can be perceived relative to another person's abilities.

When Walls are No Longer Barriers: Perception of Wall Height in Parkour

Through training, skilled parkour athletes (traceurs) overcome everyday obstacles, such as walls, that are typically insurmountable. Traceurs and untrained novices estimated the height of walls and reported their anticipated ability to climb the wall. The traceurs perceived the walls as shorter than did novices. This result suggests that perception is scaled by the perceiver's anticipated ability to act, and is consistent with the action-specific account of perception.