Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (3)
Year of publication
- 2022 (3) (remove)
Document Type
- Journal article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Keywords
- action effects (1)
- action representation (1)
- appearance (1)
- color perception (1)
- hand movements (1)
- ideomotor theory (1)
- learning arbitrary mappings (1)
- maximum likelihood difference scaling (1)
- motor control (1)
- psychophysics (1)
Institute
- Institut für Psychologie (3) (remove)
Visual perception of surfaces is of utmost importance in everyday life. Therefore, it comes naturally, that different surface structures evoke different visual impressions in the viewer even if the material underlying these surface structures is the same. This topic is especially virulent for manufacturing processes in which more than one stakeholder is involved, but where the final product needs to meet certain criteria. A common practice to address such slight but perceivable differences in the visual appearance of structured surfaces is that trained evaluators assess the samples and assign a pass or fail. However, this process is both time consuming and cost intensive. Thus, we conducted two studies to analyze the relationship between physical surface structure parameters and participants visual assessment of the samples. With the first experiment, we aimed at uncovering a relationship between physical roughness parameters and visual lightness perception while the second experiment was designed to test participants' discrimination sensitivity across the range of stimuli. Perceived lightness and the measured surface roughness were nonlinearly related to the surface structure. Additionally, we found a linear relationship between the engraving parameter and physical brightness. Surface structure was an ideal predictor for perceived lightness and participants discriminated equally well across the entire range of surface structures.
The present study examined the perceptual consequences of learning arbitrary mappings between visual stimuli and hand movements. Participants moved a small cursor with their unseen hand twice to a large visual target object and then judged either the relative distance of the hand movements (Exp.1), or the relative number of dots that appeared in the two consecutive target objects (Exp.2) using a two-alternative forced choice method. During a learning phase, the numbers of dots that appeared in the target object were correlated with the hand movement distance. In Exp.1, we observed that after the participants were trained to expect many dots with larger hand movements, they judged movements made to targets with many dots as being longer than the same movements made to targets with few dots. In Exp.2, another group of participants who received the same training judged the same number of dots as smaller when larger rather than smaller hand movements were executed. When many dots were paired with smaller hand movements during the learning phase of both experiments, no significant changes in the perception of movements and of visual stimuli were observed. These results suggest that changes in the perception of body states and of external objects can arise when certain body characteristics co-occur with certain characteristics of the environment. They also indicate that the (dis)integration of multimodal perceptual signals depends not only on the physical or statistical relation between these signals, but on which signal is currently attended.
The sociomotor framework outlines a possible role of social action effects on human action control, suggesting that anticipated partner reactions are a major cue to represent, select, and initiate own body movements. Here, we review studies that elucidate the actual content of social action representations and that explore factors that can distinguish action control processes involving social and inanimate action effects. Specifically, we address two hypotheses on how the social context can influence effect-based action control: first, by providing unique social features such as body-related, anatomical codes, and second, by orienting attention towards any relevant feature dimensions of the action effects. The reviewed empirical work presents a surprisingly mixed picture: while there is indirect evidence for both accounts, previous studies that directly addressed the anatomical account showed no signs of the involvement of genuinely social features in sociomotor action control. Furthermore, several studies show evidence against the differentiation of social and non-social action effect processing, portraying sociomotor action representations as remarkably non-social. A focus on enhancing the social experience in future studies should, therefore, complement the current database to establish whether such settings give rise to the hypothesized influence of social context.