The Separation of Action and Perception and the Issue of Affordances

Kamp, John van der; Savelsbergh, Geert J.P.; Rosengren, Karl S.

doi:10.1207/s15326969eco1302_9

Cited by 18 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the optical information for the perception of the time-to-contact of an approaching ball, may be different from the optical information used to regulate the timing of a movement (cf. Milner and Goodale 1995;Michaels 2000;van der Kamp et al 2001). As shown in the present experiment, actors do not always rely on perceived TTC to time the movement initiation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 43%

Catching optical information for the regulation of timing

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research almost unambiguously refutes the hypothesis that the timing of interceptive actions is solely based on the relative rate of expansion [i.e. τ(ϕ)]. The aim of the present experiment was to evaluated the merits of eight alternative informational variables that recently have been proposed in the literature i:e: _ '; _ ; _ Á; ' ð Þ; ð Þ; Á ð Þ; ð'; Þ; À Á . Participants (n=7) were required to regulate the spatio-temporal characteristics of their reach and grasp to catch a ball approaching on a constant spatial trajectory. To identify the information used to regulate the timing of the catch we examined the qualitative effects of ball speed (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 m/s) and viewing (monocular versus binocular) on the kinematics of the catch. Subsequently, we directly assessed the quantitative relationship between informational variables and the timing of reach onset and hand closure. The findings raised serious doubts against the use of variables that specified the time-to-contact between the ball and the point of observation (i.e. relative rate of expansion and disparity). Further, optical variables solely confined to the trajectory of the ball (i.e. the absolute rate of expansion) did yield positive results for the timing of reach onset but not for the timing of hand closure. Only variables that were related to the closure of the gap between hand and ball were found to contribute to the timing of hand closure. These results suggest that information related to the constriction of the optical gap between end-effector and ball becomes more important with approach, whereas the contribution of the absolute rate of expansion becomes less leading.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 43%

Catching optical information for the regulation of timing

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Notwithstanding this and other conceptual differences with ecological psychology, we agree with Michaels that there is a lot to gain by accepting a separation between action and perception (Van der Kamp, Savelsbergh & Rosengren, 2001). Hence, we endorse the view that vision for action and vision for perception may indeed be functionally dissociated (cf.…”

Section: Action Perception and Informationmentioning

confidence: 58%

Action and perception in infancy

Kamp

Savelsbergh

2000

Infant Behavior and Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this introduction to the special issue on Action and perception in infancy, we summarize recent arguments of Milner and Goodale for a dissociation between vision for action and vision for perception in adults. We propose that this dissociation is probably present from birth, and further that vision for action and vision for perception follow different developmental trajectories. Based on this framework, we discern four themes of interest for infancy research (i.e., information and action, exploration and action, information and perception, and the interaction between action and perception) and introduce the contributions of the special issue accordingly.

show abstract

“…Vision for action is primarily concerned with the control of action in the environment (Goodale & Haffenden, 1998;Goodale & Humphrey, 1998;Milner & Goodale, 1995;Norman, 2002). By implication, verbal judgements tap the ventral rather than the dorsal stream providing ''information for perception'' that is not necessarily accurate (Goodale & Humphrey, 1998;van der Kamp, Savelsbergh, & Rosengren, 2001). Vision for action, as supported by dorsal stream activity, should be accurate and requires ''veridical evaluation of the surface layout for effective interaction with the immediate environment'' (Bhalla & Proffitt, 1999, p. 1093.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%