Action capabilities are always subject to limits. Whether on foot or in a vehicle, people can only move so fast, slow down so quickly, and turn so sharply. The successful performance of almost any perceptual-motor task requires actors to learn and continually relearn their ever-changing action capabilities. Such learning can be considered an example of perceptual-motor calibration. The present study includes two experiments designed to address basic questions about the nature of this calibration process. Subjects performed a simulated braking task, using a foot pedal to slow down to a stop in front of an obstacle in the path of motion. At one point in the experiment, the strength of the brake was increased or decreased unbeknownst to subjects, and behavior before and after the change in brake strength was analyzed for evidence of recalibration. Experiment 1 showed that actors rapidly recalibrate following a change in brake dynamics, even when they are unaware of the change. In Experiment 2, the scene turned black one second after braking was initiated. Subjects still recalibrated following the change in brake strength, suggesting that information in the sensory consequences of the initial brake adjustment is sufficient for recalibration, even in the absence of feedback about the outcome (i.e., in terms of final position error) of the task. Discussion focuses on the critical but often overlooked role of calibration in continuously controlled visually guided action, and the nature of the information used for recalibration.
Optic Flow Grip Force Stop Sign Action Capability Brake Pedal
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
This research was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation (BCS 0236734). I thank Mark Stenpeck and Brian Richmond for programming the simulation and Sarah Bowie for collecting the data.
Bhalla M, Proffitt DR (1999) Visual-motor recalibration in geographical slant perception. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 25:1076–1096PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bingham GP, Bradley A, Bailey M, Vinner R (2001) Accommodation, occlusion, and disparity matching are used to guide reaching: a comparison of actual versus virtual environments. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 27:1314–1334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bingham GP, Pagano CC (1998) The necessity of a perception-action approach to definite distance perception: monocular distance perception to guide reaching. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 24:145–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bingham GP, Romack JL (1999) The rate of adaptation to displacement prisms remains constant despite acquisition of rapid calibration. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 25:1331–1346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruggeman H, Pick HL Jr, Rieser JJ (2005) Learning to throw on a rotating carousel: recalibration based on limb dynamics and projectile kinematics. Exp Brain Res 163:188–197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chardenon A, Montagne G, Laurent M, Bootsma RJ (2004) The perceptual control of goal-directed locomotion: a common control architecture for interception and navigation? Exp Brain Res 158:100–108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson PR, Wolpert DM (2005) Widespread access to predictive models in the motor system: a short review. J Neural Eng 2:S313–319PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dessing JC, Peper CE, Bullock D, Beek PJ (2005) How position, velocity, and temporal information combine in the prospective control of catching: data and model. J Cogn Neurosci 17:668–686PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durgin FH, Pelah A, Fox LF, Lewis J, Kane R, Walley KA (2005) Self-motion perception during locomotor recalibration: more than meets the eye. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 31:398–419PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lackner JR, DiZio P (1997) The role of reafference in recalibration of limb movement control and locomotion. J Vestib Res 7:303–310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee DN (1976) A theory of visual control of braking based on information about time-to-collision. Perception 5:437–459PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenoir M, Musch E, Janssens M, Thiery E, Uyttenhove J (1999) Intercepting moving objects during self-motion. J Motor Behav 31:55–67Google Scholar
McBeath MK, Shaffer DM, Kaiser MK (1995) How baseball outfielders determine where to run to catch fly balls. Science 268:569–573PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLeod P, Reed N, Dienes Z (2006) The generalized optic acceleration cancellation theory of catching. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 32:139–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miall RC, Jackson JK (2006) Adaptation to visual feedback delays in manual tracking: evidence against the Smith Predictor model of human visually guided action. Exp Brain Res 172:77–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michaels CF, Oudejans RR (1992) The optics and actions of catching fly balls: zeroing out optical acceleration. Ecol Psychol 4:199–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nowak DA, Hermsdorfer J (2003) Sensorimotor memory and grip force control: does grip force anticipate a self-produced weight change when drinking with a straw from a cup? Eur J Neurosci 18:2883–2892PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oudejans RD, Michaels CF, van Dort B, Frissen EJP (1996a) To cross or not to cross: the effect of locomotion on street-crossing behavior. Ecol Psychol 8:259–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oudejans RRD, Michaels CF, Bakker FC, Dolne MA (1996b) The relevance of action in perceiving affordances: perception of catchableness of fly balls. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 22:879–891PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Withagen R, Michaels CF (2004) Transfer of calibration in length perception by dynamic touch. Percept Psychophys 66:1282–1292PubMedGoogle Scholar
Withagen R, Michaels CF (2005) The role of feedback information for calibration and attunement in perceiving length by dynamic touch. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 31:1379–1390PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolpert DM, Ghahramani Z, Jordan MI (1995) An internal model for sensorimotor integration. Science 269:1880–1882PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar