TY  - JOUR
A1  - Klaffehn, Annika L.
A1  - Sellmann, Florian B.
A1  - Kirsch, Wladimir
A1  - Kunde, Wilfried
A1  - Pfister, Roland
T1  - Temporal binding as multisensory integration: Manipulating perceptual certainty of actions and their effects
JF  - Attention, Perception & Psychophysics
N2  - It has been proposed that statistical integration of multisensory cues may be a suitable framework to explain temporal binding, that is, the finding that causally related events such as an action and its effect are perceived to be shifted towards each other in time. A multisensory approach to temporal binding construes actions and effects as individual sensory signals, which are each perceived with a specific temporal precision. When they are integrated into one multimodal event, like an action-effect chain, the extent to which they affect this event's perception depends on their relative reliability. We test whether this assumption holds true in a temporal binding task by manipulating certainty of actions and effects. Two experiments suggest that a relatively uncertain sensory signal in such action-effect sequences is shifted more towards its counterpart than a relatively certain one. This was especially pronounced for temporal binding of the action towards its effect but could also be shown for effect binding. Other conceptual approaches to temporal binding cannot easily explain these results, and the study therefore adds to the growing body of evidence endorsing a multisensory approach to temporal binding.
KW  - temporal processing
KW  - perception and action
KW  - multisensory processing
Y1  - 2021
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-273195
SN  - 1943-393X
VL  - 83
IS  - 8
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Liesner, Marvin
A1  - Kirsch, Wladimir
A1  - Pfister, Roland
A1  - Kunde, Wilfried
T1  - Spatial action-effect binding depends on type of action-effect transformation
JF  - Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
N2  - 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.
KW  - action–effect compatibility
KW  - agency
KW  - body ownership
KW  - ideomotor theory
KW  - proprioceptive drift
KW  - spatial binding
KW  - tool use
Y1  - 2020
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-232781
SN  - 1943-3921
VL  - 82
ER  -