Recent studies have shown that anticipatory eye movements occur during both action observation and action execution. These findings strongly support the direct matching hypothesis, which states that in observing others’ actions, people take advantage of the same action knowledge that enables them to perform the same actions. Furthermore, a connection between action experience and the ability to anticipate action goals has been proposed. Concerning the role of experience, most studies concentrated on motor experts such as athletes and musicians, whereas only few studies investigated whether motor programs can be activated by short-term experience. Applying a pre–post design, we examined whether short-term experience affects anticipatory eye movements during observation. Participants (N = 150 university students) observed scenes showing an actor performing a block stacking task. Subsequently, participants performed either a block stacking task, puzzles, or a pursuit rotor task. Afterward, participants were again provided with the aforementioned block stacking task scenes. Results revealed that the block stacking task group directed their gaze significantly earlier toward the action goals of the block stacking task during posttest trials, compared with Puzzle and pursuit rotor task groups, which did not differ from each other. In accordance with the direct matching hypothesis, our study provides evidence that short-term experience with the block stacking task activates task-specific action knowledge.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
This research was conducted within the International Research Training Group “Adaptive Minds” supported by German Research Foundation (DFG) under Grant 1457. We are grateful to Alexander Kirmße for support with stimuli recording, Laura Weber for help with data collection, and Florian Domnick for support with programming. We would further like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their constructive and helpful comments on an earlier version of the article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Gredebäck G, Stasiewicz D, Falck-Ytter T, von Hofsten C, Rosander K (2009) Action type and goal type modulate goal-directed gaze shifts in 14-month-old infants. Dev Psychol 45:1190–1194. doi:10.1037/a0015667PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton A, Wolpert D, Frith U (2004) Your own action influences how you perceive another person’s action. Curr Biol 14:493–498PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hommel B, Müsseler J, Aschersleben G, Prinz W (2001) The theory of event coding (TEC): a framework for perception and action planning. Behav Brain Sci 24:849–878PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knoblich G, Flach R (2001) Predicting the effects of actions: interactions of perception and action. Psychol Sci 12:467–472PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kochukhova O, Gredebäck G (2010) Preverbal infants anticipate that food will be brought to the mouth: an eye tracking study of manual feeding and flying spoons. Child Dev 81:1729–1738PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petermann F (2011) Movement assessment battery for children-2 (movement ABC-2)—manual. Pearson, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
Prinz W (1990) A common coding approach to perception and action. In: Neumann O, Prinz W (eds) Relationships between perception and action: current approaches. Springer, Berlin, pp 167–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sartori L, Begliomini C, Castiello U (2013) Motor resonance in left- and right-handers: evidence for effector-independent motor representations. Front Hum Neurosci 7:1–8. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00033Google Scholar
Smit AC, Van Gisbergen JA (1989) A short-latency transition in saccade dynamics during square-wave tracking and its significance for the differentiation of visually-guided and predictive saccades. Exp Brain Res 76:64–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar