What first drives visual attention during the recognition of object-directed actions? The role of kinematics and goal information

Decroix, Jérémy; Kalénine, Solène

doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01784-7

Cited by 16 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this sense, our results align with multiple studies that have shown how participants may concentrate on the action's goal component more than on its manipulation component (e.g., Massen & Prinz, 2007;Osiurak & Badets, 2014). These goalrelated patterns have also been traced in observational investigations where observers looked at an actor using an object (e.g., Decroix & Kalénine, 2019;Naish, Reader, Houston-Price, Bremner, & Holmes, 2013;Nicholson, Roser, & Bach, 2017;van Elk, van Schie, & Bekkering, 2008). Such studies investigated the action's goal component regarding objects' functional AOIs, thus implicitly referring to the semantic/technical knowledge retrievable by looking at objects.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

The visual encoding of graspable unfamiliar objects

Federico¹,

Brandimonte

Salvatore³

et al. 2022

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We explored by eye-tracking the visual encoding modalities of participants (N = 20) involved in a freeobservation task in which three repetitions of ten unfamiliar graspable objects were administered. Then, we analysed the temporal allocation (t = 1500ms) of visual-spatial attention to objects' manipulation (i.e., the part aimed at grasping the object) and functional (i.e., the part aimed at recognizing the function and identity of the object) areas. We found a reversed quadratic trend in the way participants visually explored the objects. Within the rst 750ms, participants tended to shift their gaze on the functional areas while decreasing their attention on the manipulation areas. Then, participants reversed this trend, decreasing their visual-spatial attention to the functional areas while relatively increasing xations to the manipulation areas. Crucially, the global amount of visual-spatial attention for objects' functional areas signi cantly decreased as an effect of stimuli repetition while remaining stable for the manipulation areas, thus indicating stimulus familiarity effects. These ndings support the action reappraisal theoretical approach, which considers object processing and tool use as abilities emerging from the integration among semantic, technical/mechanical, and sensorimotor knowledge.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

The visual encoding of graspable unfamiliar objects

Federico¹,

Brandimonte

Salvatore³

et al. 2022

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The rather low performances in the task most likely reflect the important working memory load induced by the response procedure. Indeed, our previous experiments with similar tasks and design revealed high-level of accuracy in performing perceptual judgements 18,41 . Similarly, perceptual judgements were rather high (90%) in the pre-test (cf.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 77%

Neural dynamics of grip and goal integration during the processing of others’ actions with objects: An ERP study

Decroix

Roger

Kalénine

2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent behavioural evidence suggests that when processing others' actions, motor acts and goalrelated information both contribute to action recognition. Yet the neuronal mechanisms underlying the dynamic integration of the two action dimensions remain unclear. this study aims to elucidate the eRp components underlying the processing and integration of grip and goal-related information. the electrophysiological activity of 28 adults was recorded during the processing of object-directed action photographs (e.g., writing with pencil) containing either grip violations (e.g. upright pencil grasped with atypical-grip), goal violations (e.g., upside-down pencil grasped with typical-grip), both grip and goal violations (e.g., upside-down pencil grasped with atypical-grip), or no violations. participants judged whether actions were overall typical or not according to object typical use. Brain activity was sensitive to the congruency between grip and goal information on the N400, reflecting the semantic integration between the two dimensions. On earlier components, brain activity was affected by grip and goal typicality independently. Critically, goal typicality but not grip typicality affected brain activity on the N300, supporting an earlier role of goal-related representations in action recognition. Findings provide new insights on the neural temporal dynamics of the integration of motor acts and goal-related information during the processing of others' actions.Understanding the actions performed by others is a core ability of human beings 1,2 . Yet, actions are no mere movements but organised and goal-directed movements 3,4 . Thus, understanding others' actions does not only imply the processing of the motor act (e.g., both dynamic and static components of reaching and grasping a bottle) but also the recognition of the actor's goal (e.g., to drink or to move it away). Accordingly, observers mainly perceive others' actions in terms of goals 5-8 and may use different sources of information to this end (e.g., dynamic and static component of the motor act 9 ; functional knowledge about objects 10 ; contextual information 11,12 , among others). Although numerous studies have demonstrated that both information about the motor act and information about the goal of the actor are processed during the decoding of others' actions, the precise role of the two types of information in action recognition remains debated.Important theoretical accounts have highlighted the need to consider the processing of others' actions as a dynamic phenomenon 3,13-15 that cannot be fully uncovered without considering the temporal dynamics of motor acts and action goal decoding. The observation of several successive periods of stability in the brain activity (i.e. "micro-state") when visually processing others' actions 16,17 further supports the idea that the decoding of others' actions is a multistep process. In a recent behavioural experiment, we also demonstrated that the involvement of action goal and static motor act information in action recog...

show abstract

“…Many experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience studies have tackled this question by designing experiments in which each component is manipulated independently. For instance, participants can have to "imitate" a model performing a tool-use action while either the motor action or the mechanical action is congruent with the participant's tool-use action [47] or to judge the appropriateness of a model's tool-use action while the motor action is correct versus incorrect and/or the mechanical action is correct versus incorrect [48][49][50][51]. The conclusions drawn from these studies are that (i.)…”

Section: Goal Versus Meansmentioning

confidence: 99%