Aglioti, S., Goodale, M., & DeSouza, J. F. X. (1995). Size contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Current Biology, 5, 679–685.
Arstila, V. (2016). Perceptual learning explains two candidates for cognitive penetration. Erkenntnis, 81(6), 1151–1172.
Binkosfski, F., & Buxbaum, L. J. (2013). Two action systems in the human brain. Brain and Language, 127(2), 222–229.
Borghi, A. M., & Riggio, L. (2015). Stable and variable affordances are both automatic and flexible. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9(351), 32–47. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00351.
Briscoe, R. (2008). Another look at the two visual systems hypothesis. Journal of Conscious Studies, 15, 35–62.
Brogaard, B. (2011a). Are there unconscious perceptual processes? Consciousness and Cognition, 20, 449–463.
Brogaard, B. (2011b). Conscious vision for action versus unconscious vision for action? Cognitive Science, 35(6), 1076–1104.
Brogaard, B. (2013). Phenomenal seemings and sensible dogmatism. In C. Tucker (Ed.), Seemings and justification: New essays on dogmatism and phenomenal conservatism (pp. 270–289). Oxford: OUP.
Brogaard, B. (2014). Seeing as a mon-experiential mental state: The case from synesthesia and visual imagery. In R. Brown (Ed.), Consciousness inside and out: Phenomenology, neuroscience, and the nature of experience (pp. 377–394). Dordrecht: Springer.
Burnston, D. (2016). Cognitive penetration and the cognition–perception interface. Synthese. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1116-y.
Burnston, D. (2017). Interface problems in the explanation of action. Philosophical Explorations, 20(2), 242–258.
Burnston, D., & Cohen, J. (2015). Perceptual integration, modularity, and cognitive penetration. In J. Zeimbekis & A. Raftopoulos (Eds.), The cognitive penetrability of perception: New philosophical perspectives. Oxford: OUP.
Butterfill, S. A., & Sinigaglia, C. (2014). Intention and motor representation in purposive action. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 88(1), 119–145.
Chinellato, E., & del Pobil, A. (2016). The visual neuroscience of robotic grasping. Achieving sensorimotor skills through dorsal-ventral stream integration. Berlin: Springer.
Christensen, A., Borchers, S., & Himmelbach, M. (2013). Effects of pictorial cues on reaching depend on the distinctiveness of target objects. PLOS One, 8(1), e54230. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0054230.
Clark, A. (2001). Visual experience and motor action: Are the bonds too tight? Philosophical Review, 110(4), 495–519.
Clark, A. (2009). Perception, action, and experience: Unraveling the golden braid. Neuropsychologia, 47(6), 1460–1468.
Connolly, K. (2014). Perceptual learning and the contents of perception. Erkenntnis, 79(6), 1407–1418.
Culham, J. C., Danckert, S. L., DeSouza, J. F. X., Gati, J. S., Menon, R. S., & Goodale, M. A. (2003). Visually guided grasping produces fMRI activation in dorsal but not ventral stream brain areas. Experimental Brain Research, 153, 180–189.
Deroy, O. (2015). Multisensory perception and cognitive penetration. In J. Zeimbekis & A. Raftopoulos (Eds.), The cognitive penetrability of perception: New philosophical perspectives. Oxford: OUP.
Dijkerman, H. C., McIntosh, R. D., Schindler, I., Nijboer, T. C. W., & Milner, A. D. (2009). Choosing between alternative wrist postures: Action planning needs perception. Neuropsyschologia, 47, 1476–1483.
Drayson, Z. (forthcoming). Direct perception and the predictive mind. Philosophical Studies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-017-0999-x.
Dretske, A. (1981). Knowledge and the flow of information. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ellis, R., Flanagan, J., & Lederman, S. (1999). The influence of visual illusions on grasp position. Experimental Brain Research, 125, 109–114.
Ferretti, G. (2016a). Through the forest of motor representations. Consciousness and Cognition, 43, 177–196.
Ferretti, G. (2016b). Visual feeling of presence. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 99(S1), 112–136.
Ferretti, G. (2016c). Pictures, action properties and motor related effects. Synthese, 193(12), 3787–3817.
Ferretti, G. (2017). Two visual systems in Molyneux Subjects. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-017-9533-z.
Ferretti, G. (forthcoming). The neural dynamics of seeing-in. Erkenntnis.
Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Friston, K. (2010). The free-energy principle: A unified brain theory? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(2), 127–138.
Gallese, V. (2007). The “conscious” dorsal stream: Embodied simulation and its role in space and action conscious awareness. Psyche, 13(1), 1–20.
Goodale, M. A. (2011). Transforming vision into action. Vision Research, 51, 1567–1587.
Goodale, M. A., & Milner, A. D. (2004). Sights unseen. Oxford: OUP.
Goodale, M. A., Milner, A. D., Jakobson, L. S., & Carey, D. P. (1991). A neurological dissociation between perceiving objects and grasping them. Nature, 349, 154–156.
Goodale, M. A., & Wolf, M. (2009). Vision for action. In D. Dedrick & L. Trick (Eds.), Computation, cognition, and pylyshyn. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Grill-Spector, K., Kushnir, T., Hendler, T., & Malach, R. (2000). The dynamics of object-selective activation correlate with recognition performance in humans. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 837–843.
Heck, R. (2000). Nonconceptual content and the “space of reasons”. Philosophical Review, 109(4), 483–523.
Hohwy, J. (2013). The predictive mind. Oxford: OUP.
Hohwy, J. (2017). Priors in perception: Top–down modulation, bayesian perceptual learning rate, and prediction error minimization. Consciousness and Cognition, 47, 75–85.
Jacob, P. (2005). Grasping and perceiving an object. In A. Brooks & K. Akins (Eds.), Cognition and the Brain. Cambridge: CUP.
Jacob, P., & Jeannerod, M. (2003). Ways of seeing: The scope and limits of visual cognition. Oxford: OUP.
Jeannerod, M. (2006). Motor cognition. What actions tell the self. Oxford: OUP.
Kozuch, B. (2015). Dislocation, not dissociation: The neuroanatomical argument against visual experience driving motor action. Mind and Language, 30(5), 572–602.
Kravitz, D. J., Kadharbatcha, S., Saleem, S., Baker, C. I., & Mishkin, M. (2011). A new neural framework for visuospatial processing. Nature Neuroscience, 12, 217–230.
Lima, C. F., Krishnan, S., & Scott, S. K. (2016). Roles of supplementary motor areas in auditory processing and auditory image. Trends in Neuroscience, 39(8), 527–542.
Lupyan, G. (2015). Cognitive penetrability of perception in the age of prediction: Predictive systems are penetrable systems. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 6(4), 547–569.
Lyons, J. (2005). Perceptual belief and nonexperiential looks. Philosophical Perspectives, 19, 237–256.
Macpherson, F. (2012). Cognitive penetration of colour experience: Rethinking the issue in light of an indirect mechanism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 84(1), 24–62.
Macpherson, F. (2015). Cognitive penetration and nonconceptual content. In J. Zeimbekis & A. Raftopoulos (Eds.), The cognitive penetrability of perception: New philosophical perspectives. Oxford: OUP.
Macpherson, F. (2017). The relationship between cognitive penetration and predictive coding. Consciousness and Cognition, 47, 6–16.
Mahon, B., & Wu, W. (2015). Cognitive penetration of the dorsal visual stream? In J. Zeimbekis & A. Raftopoulos (Eds.), The cognitive penetrability of perception: New philosophical perspectives (pp. 200–217). Oxford: OUP.
McIntosh, R. D., & Lashleya, G. (2008). Matching boxes: Familiar size influences action programming. Neuropsychologia, 46, 2441–2444.
Milner, A. D. (2008). Conscious and unconscious visual processing in the human brain. In L. Weiskrantz & M. Davies (Eds.), Frontiers of consciousness. Oxford: OUP.
Milner, A. D., & Goodale, M. A. (1995). The visual brain in action. Oxford: OUP.
Milner, A. D., & Goodale, M. A. (2006). The visual brain in action (2nd ed.). Oxford: OUP.
Milner, A. D., & Goodale, M. A. (2008). Two visual systems re-visited. Neuropsychologia, 46, 774–785.
Mole, C. (2009). Illusions, demonstratives and the zombie action hypothesis. Mind, 118, 995–1011.
Mylopoulos, M., & Pacherie, E. (2017). Intentions and motor representations: The interface challenge. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 8(2), 317–336.
Nanay, B. (2013a). Between perception and action. Oxford: OUP.
Nanay, B. (2013b). Is action-guiding vision cognitively impenetrable? In Proceedings of the 35th annual conference of the cognitive science society (CogSci 2013) (pp. 1055–1060). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Norman, J. (2002). Two visual systems and two theories of perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 73–144.
Pisella, L., Gréa, H., Tilikete, H. C., Vighetto, A., Desmurget, M., Rode, G., et al. (2000). An ‘automatic pilot’ for the hand in human posterior parietal cortex: Toward reinterpreting optic ataxia. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 729–736.
Pylyshyn, Z. (1984). Computation and cognition: Toward a foundation for cognitive science. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Pylyshyn, Z. (1999). Is vision continuous with cognition? The case for cognitive impenetrability of visual perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 341–365.
Raftopoulos, A. (2001). Is perception informationally encapsulated? The issue of the theory-ladenness of perception. Cognitive Science, 25, 423–451.
Raftopoulos, A. (2005). Perceptual systems and a viable form of realism. In A. Raftopoulos (Ed.), Cognitive penetrability of perception. Nova Science: Hauppauge.
Raftopoulos, A. (2009). Cognition and perception: How do psychology and neural science inform philosophy?. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Raftopoulos, A. (2017). Timing time: Why early vision is cognitively impenetrable. In Proceedings of the annual meeting of the cognitive science society (COGSI, 2017) (pp. 974–979).
Reiland, I. (2014). On experiencing high-level properties. American Philosophical Quarterly, 51, 177–187.
Reiland, I. (2015). Experience, seemings, and evidence. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 96, 510–534.
Rizzolatti, G., & Matelli, M. (2003). Two different streams form the dorsal visual system: Anatomy and functions. Experimental Brain Research, 153, 146–157.
Rizzolatti, G., & Sinigaglia, C. (2008). Mirrors in the brain: How our minds share actions, emotions, and experience. Oxford: OUP.
Rossetti, Y., McIntosh, R. D., Revol, P., Pisella, L., Rode, G., Danckert, J., et al. (2005). Visually guided reaching: Bilateral posterior parietal lesions cause a switch from fast visuomotor to slow cognitive control. Neuropsychologia, 43, 162–177.
Rossetti, Y., Pisella, L., & Vighetto, A. (2003). Optic ataxia revisited: Visually guided action versus immediate visuomotor control. Experimental Brain Research, 153, 171–179.
Schenk, T., & McIntosh, R. D. (2010). Do we have independent visual streams for perception and action? Cognitive Neuroscience, 1(1), 52–78.
Shepherd, J. (2017). Skilled action and the double life of intention. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12433.
Stokes, D. (2013). Cognitive penetrability of perception. Philosophy Compass, 8(7), 646–663.
Toribio, J. (2015). Visual experience: Rich but impenetrable. Synthese. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-015-0889-8.
Toribio, J. (forthcoming). Visual categorization. In B. Glenney & J. F. Pereira da Silva (Eds.) The senses and the history of philosophy. Oxford: Routledge.
Tovée, M. J. (1994). How fast is the speed of thought? Neuronal Processing, 4(12), 1125–1127.
Tucker, C. (2010). Why open-minded people should endorse dogmatism. Philosophical Perspectives, 24, 529–545.
Turella, L., & Lingnau, A. (2014). Neural correlates of grasping. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00686.
Wu, W. (2014). Against division: Consciousness, information and the visual systems. Mind and Language, 29(4), 383–406.
Zipoli Caiani, S., & Ferretti, G. (2017). Semantic and pragmatic integration in vision for action. Consciousness and Cognition, 48, 40–54.
Zipoli Caiani, S., & Ferretti, G. (forthcoming). Solving the interface problem without translation: The same format thesis. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly.