A test of the embodied simulation theory of object perception: potentiation of responses to artifacts and animals
- 365 Downloads
Theories of embodied object representation predict a tight association between sensorimotor processes and visual processing of manipulable objects. Previous research has shown that object handles can ‘potentiate’ a manual response (i.e., button press) to a congruent location. This potentiation effect is taken as evidence that objects automatically evoke sensorimotor simulations in response to the visual presentation of manipulable objects. In the present series of experiments, we investigated a critical prediction of the theory of embodied object representations that potentiation effects should be observed with manipulable artifacts but not non-manipulable animals. In four experiments we show that (a) potentiation effects are observed with animals and artifacts; (b) potentiation effects depend on the absolute size of the objects and (c) task context influences the presence/absence of potentiation effects. We conclude that potentiation effects do not provide evidence for embodied object representations, but are suggestive of a more general stimulus–response compatibility effect that may depend on the distribution of attention to different object features.
KeywordsTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Attentional Bias Simon Effect Compatibility Effect Object Category
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest in the preparation of the manuscript.
- Allport, D. A. (1985). Distributed memory, modular subsystems and dysphasia. In S. D. Newman & R. Epstein (Eds.), Current perspectives in dysphasia (pp. 207–244). New York: Churchill Livingstone.Google Scholar
- Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999-0. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html. Accessed 1 Aug 2012.
- Cate, A., Goodale, M., & Köhler, S. (2011). The role of apparent size in building- and object-specific regions of ventral visual cortex. Brain Research, 4, 09–122.Google Scholar
- Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
- Hillyard, S. A., Vogel, E. K., & Luck, S. J. (1998). Sensory gain control (amplification) as a mechanism of selective attention: electrophysiological and neuroimaging evidence. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 353(1373), 1257–1270.Google Scholar
- Kirchner, H., & Thorpe, S. J. (2006). Ultra-rapid object detection with saccadic eye movements: visual processing speed revisited. Vision Research, 46(11), 1762–1776.Google Scholar
- Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility--a model and taxonomy. Psychological review, 97(2), 253–270. Google Scholar
- Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Lawrence, MA. (2012). ez: Easy analysis and visualization of factorial experiments. R package version 4.1-1. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ez. Accessed 1 Aug 2012.
- Pellicano, A., Iani, C., Borghi, A. M., Rubichi, S., & Nicoletti, R. (2010). Simon-like and functional affordance effects with tools: the effects of object perceptual discrimination and object action state. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(11), 2190–2201.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pulvermüller, F., Hauk, O., Nikulin, V. V., & Ilmoniemi, R. J. (2005). Functional links between motor and language systems. European Journal of Neuroscience, 21(3), 793–797.Google Scholar
- Schacter, D. L., & Buckner, R. L. (1998). Priming and the brain. Neuron, 20, 185–195.Google Scholar
- Shapiro, L. (2011). Embodied Cognition. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
- R Core Team (2012). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 1 Aug 2012.
- Tremblay, R., & Ransijn, J. (2011). LMERConvenienceFunctions: a suite of functions to back-fit fixed effects and forward-fit random effects, as well as other miscellaneous functions. R Package Version, 1(6), 7.Google Scholar
- Whelan, R. (2008). Effective analysis of reaction time data. The Psychological Record, 58, 475–482.Google Scholar