@article{LiesnerKirschPfisteretal.2020,
  author    = {Liesner, Marvin and Kirsch, Wladimir and Pfister, Roland and Kunde, Wilfried},
  title     = {Spatial action-effect binding depends on type of action-effect transformation},
  series = {Attention, Perception, \& Psychophysics},
  volume    = {82},
  journal   = {Attention, Perception, \& Psychophysics},
  issn      = {1943-3921},
  doi       = {10.3758/s13414-020-02013-2},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-232781},
  pages     = {2531-2543},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Spatial action-effect binding denotes the mutual attraction between the perceived position of an effector (e.g., one's own hand) and a distal object that is controlled by this effector. Such spatial binding can be construed as an implicit measure of object ownership, thus the belonging of a controlled object to the own body. The current study investigated how different transformations of hand movements (body-internal action component) into movements of a visual object (body-external action component) affect spatial action-effect binding, and thus implicit object ownership. In brief, participants had to bring a cursor on the computer screen into a predefined target position by moving their occluded hand on a tablet and had to estimate their final hand position. In Experiment 1, we found a significantly lower drift of the proprioceptive position of the hand towards the visual object when hand movements were transformed into laterally inverted cursor movements, rather than cursor movements in the same direction. Experiment 2 showed that this reduction reflected an elimination of spatial action-effect binding in the inverted condition. The results are discussed with respect to the prerequisites for an experience of ownership over artificial, noncorporeal objects. Our results show that predictability of an object movement alone is not a sufficient condition for ownership because, depending on the type of transformation, integration of the effector and a distal object can be fully abolished even under conditions of full controllability.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{WirthFoersterKundeetal.2020,
  author    = {Wirth, Robert and Foerster, Anna and Kunde, Wilfried and Pfister, Roland},
  title     = {Design choices: Empirical recommendations for designing two-dimensional finger-tracking experiments},
  series = {Behavior Research Methods},
  volume    = {52},
  journal   = {Behavior Research Methods},
  doi       = {10.3758/s13428-020-01409-0},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-235569},
  pages     = {2394-2416},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {The continuous tracking of mouse or finger movements has become an increasingly popular research method for investigating cognitive and motivational processes such as decision-making, action-planning, and executive functions. In the present paper, we evaluate and discuss how apparently trivial design choices of researchers may impact participants' behavior and, consequently, a study's results. We first provide a thorough comparison of mouse- and finger-tracking setups on the basis of a Simon task. We then vary a comprehensive set of design factors, including spatial layout, movement extent, time of stimulus onset, size of the target areas, and hit detection in a finger-tracking variant of this task. We explore the impact of these variations on a broad spectrum of movement parameters that are typically used to describe movement trajectories. Based on our findings, we suggest several recommendations for best practice that avoid some of the pitfalls of the methodology. Keeping these recommendations in mind will allow for informed decisions when planning and conducting future tracking experiments.},
  language  = {en}
}