Literature DB >> 14608506

Actions blind to conceptually overlapping stimuli.

Wilfried Kunde1, Peter Wühr.   

Abstract

Participants are worse at identifying spatial symbols (arrowheads) while performing spatially compatible manual key presses. The present experiments investigated the generality of this "blindness effect" to response-compatible stimuli. In Experiment 1 a left key press deteriorated the identification of left-pointing arrows, and a right key press deteriorated the perception of right-pointing arrows, independent of the hands used to press the key. Thus the blindness effect is based on codes of the distal response location rather than on the body-intrinsic anatomical connection of the hands. Experiment 2 extended the blindness effect to verbal responses and written position words (left, right, up, down). Vocalizing a position word blinded to directly compatible position words (e.g., left-left), but not to orthogonally compatible position words (e.g., left-down). This result suggests that the use of identical stimulus-response codes, and not the use of saliency-matching but distinct codes, suffices to produce blindness effects. Finally, Experiment 3 extended the blindness phenomenon beyond the spatial domain by demonstrating blindness between saying color words and perceiving color patches. Altogether, the experiments revealed action-induced blindness to be a phenomenon of broad empirical validity occurring whenever action and perception afford simultaneous access to the same conceptual codes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14608506     DOI: 10.1007/s00426-003-0156-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Res        ISSN: 0340-0727


  14 in total

1.  Vertical versus horizontal spatial compatibility: right-left prevalence with bimanual responses.

Authors:  K P Vu; R W Proctor; D F Pick
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2000

2.  Time course of the blindness to response-compatible stimuli.

Authors:  P Wühr; J Müsseler
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  Can blindness to response-compatible stimuli be observed in the absence of a response?

Authors:  Biljana Stevanovski; Chris Oriet; Pierre Jolicoeur
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Learning and performance on a key-pressing task as function of the degree of spatial stimulus-response correspondence.

Authors:  R E MORIN; D A GRANT
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1955-01

5.  Action-feature integration blinds to feature-overlapping perceptual events: evidence from manual and vocal actions.

Authors:  Bernhard Hommel; Jochen Müsseler
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.143

Review 6.  Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility--a model and taxonomy.

Authors:  S Kornblum; T Hasbroucq; A Osman
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Blindness to response-compatible stimuli.

Authors:  J Müsseler; B Hommel
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  Repetition blindness: type recognition without token individuation.

Authors:  N G Kanwisher
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1987-11

9.  Repetition blindness and bilingual memory: token individuation for translation equivalents.

Authors:  J Altarriba; E G Soltano
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1996-11

10.  Compatibility due to the coding of the relative position of the effectors.

Authors:  R Nicoletti; C Umiltà; E Ladavas
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  1984-10
View more
  13 in total

1.  See what you've done! Active touch affects the number of perceived visual objects.

Authors:  Wilfried Kunde; Andrea Kiesel
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2006-04

2.  Effector identity and orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility in blindness to response-compatible stimuli.

Authors:  Akio Nishimura; Kazuhiko Yokosawa
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2009-02-12

3.  Biasing spatial attention with semantic information: an event coding approach.

Authors:  Tarek Amer; Davood G Gozli; Jay Pratt
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-04-21

4.  Dissecting the response in response-effect compatibility.

Authors:  Roland Pfister; Wilfried Kunde
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-11-28       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Ideomotor perception modulates visuospatial cueing.

Authors:  Davood G Gozli; Stephanie C Goodhew; Joshua B Moskowitz; Jay Pratt
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2012-11-06

6.  Action effect features, but not anatomical features, determine the Backward Crosstalk Effect: evidence from crossed-hands experiments.

Authors:  Sandra Renas; Moritz Durst; Markus Janczyk
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-06-15

7.  The role of cue-response mapping in motorvisual impairment and facilitation: evidence for different roles of action planning and action control in motorvisual dual-task priming.

Authors:  Roland Thomaschke; Brian Hopkins; R Christopher Miall
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2011-08-01       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 8.  Sociomotor action control.

Authors:  Wilfried Kunde; Lisa Weller; Roland Pfister
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-06

9.  On interference effects in concurrent perception and action.

Authors:  Jan Zwickel; Marc Grosjean; Wolfgang Prinz
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2009-02-13

10.  Investigating ideomotor cognition with motorvisual priming paradigms: key findings, methodological challenges, and future directions.

Authors:  Roland Thomaschke
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-11-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.