Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

SAGE Journal User Guide

Predicting the Effects of Actions: Interactions of Perception and Action Günther Knoblich and Rüdiger Flach Psychological Science, November 2001; vol. 12, 6: pp. 467-472.

Abstract

Many theories in cognitive psychology assume that perception and action systems are clearly separated from the cognitive system. Other theories suggest that important cognitive functions reside in the interactions between these systems. One consequence of the latter claim is that the action system may contribute to predicting the future consequences of currently perceived actions. In particular, such predictions might be more accurate when one observes one's own actions than when one observes another person's actions, because in the former case the system that plans the action is the same system that contributes to predicting the action's effects. In the present study, participants (N = 104) watched video clips displaying either themselves or somebody else throwing a dart at a target board and predicted the dart's landing position. The predictions were more accurate when participants watched themselves acting. This result provides evidence for the claim that perceptual input can be linked with the action system to predict future outcomes of actions.

Discussion questions:

1. Explain what the authors mean by the “interaction of perception and action.” What perspective of cognitive psychology is this consistent with?
2. Explain how the task used in this study involves the “interaction of perception and action.”
3. Explain how their results from this task support the “interaction of perception and action.”

Confuse Your Illusion: Feedback to Early Visual Cortex Contributes to Perceptual Completion Martijn E. Wokke, Annelinde R. E. Vandenbroucke, H. Steven Scholte, and Victor A. F. Lamme Psychological Science, January 2013; vol. 24, 1: pp. 63-71., first published on December 10, 2012

Abstract

A striking example of the constructive nature of visual perception is how the human visual system completes contours of occluded objects. To date, it is unclear whether perceptual completion emerges during early stages of visual processing or whether higher-level mechanisms are necessary. To answer this question, we used transcranial magnetic stimulation to disrupt signaling in V1/V2 and in the lateral occipital (LO) area at different moments in time while participants performed a discrimination task involving a Kanizsa-type illusory figure. Results show that both V1/V2 and higher-level visual area LO are critically involved in perceptual completion. However, these areas seem to be involved in an inverse hierarchical fashion, in which the critical time window for V1/V2 follows that for LO. These results are in line with the growing evidence that feedback to V1/V2 contributes to perceptual completion.

Discussion questions:

1. Explain what “transcranial magnetic stimulation” is and how the researchers used this technique in their study.
2. Describe the visual illusion the researchers investigated in this study. What was the primary question they examined about the processing of this illusion?
3. What did the results of this study allow the researchers to conclude about the involvement of “lower-order and higher-order visual processes” in the processing of the visual illusion?