Dissociating perception from judgment in the action-specific effect of blocking ease on perceived speed

Tool Use Affects Spatial Perception

Tools do not just expand our capabilities. They change what we can do, and in doing so, they change who we are. Serena is Serena because of what she can do with a tennis racket. Tiger is Tiger because of what he can do with a golf club. In changing what we can do, tools also change the very way we perceive the spatial layout of the world. Objects beyond arm's reach appear closer when we wield a tool that can expand out to the object. Catchable objects seem to move faster when we wield a tool that is less effective for catching the object. These examples illustrate how the basic processes of spatial vision are impacted by tool use.

The Pong Effect as a Robust Visual Illusion: Evidence From Manipulating Instructions

Visual perception is not always veridical but can be influenced by factors such as ease of acting, energetic cost, and even body type of the observer. This notion is called action-specific perception. Several effects of action capability on visual perception have been found, but there is much controversy as to whether these effects are truly perceptual. Because perception cannot be measured directly, resolving the controversy relies on ruling out alternative explanations through systematic testing. We combined one of the most robust action-specific effects (the Pong effect) with one of the primary suggestions for exploring an alternative explanation, namely whether the effect persists across instructions that emphasize different aspects of the task. The Pong effect was robust to the type of instructions. The results provide critical evidence that the Pong effect is truly perceptual, furthering the argument that a person's ability to act can influence visual perception.

Human and machine: Evaluating whether action automation influences visual perception

The action-specific account of perception suggests that our perceptual system is influenced by information about our ability to act in our environment and, thus, affects our perception. However, the specific information about action that is influential for perception is still largely unknown. For example, if a goal is achieved through automation rather than action, is perception influenced because the goal was achieved or is perception immune because the act was automated rather than performed by the observer? In four experiments, we examined whether automating a paddle to block a moving ball in a computer game similar to Pong affects perception of the ball's speed. Results indicate that the automation used here did not affect speed perception of the target. Whereas tools such as reach-extending sticks and various-sized paddles are both incorporated into one's body schema and also influence spatial perception, automation, our results imply that automation is not incorporated into one's body schema and does not affect spatial perception. The dissociation in how the mind treats tools versus automation could have several implications as automation becomes more prevalent in daily life.

Action's influence on spatial perception: resolution and a mystery

Despite the impression that perception of spatial layout including distance, slant, and size is objective and geometrically accurate, spatial perception is influenced by a perceiver's ability to act. Hills appear steeper when the perceiver is fatigued, and balls appear faster when they are harder to block. The same environment looks different when the perceiver is better able to act than when actions are constrained. Claims of action's influence on spatial perception have been met with much controversy, and spurred many experiments designed to explore alternative explanations. In at least one case, these alternative explanations have failed to account for action's effect, thereby leading to the conclusion that the potential for action can truly influence spatial perception. The mystery remains, however, as to how action exerts its influence.

What you see and what you are told: an action-specific effect that is unaffected by explicit feedback

A critical question for theories of spatial vision concerns the nature of the inputs to perception. The action-specific account asserts that information related to action, specifically a perceiver's ability to perform the intended action, is one of these sources of information. This claim challenges assumptions about the mind in general and perception in particular, and not surprisingly, has been met with much resistance. Alternative explanations include that these effects are due to response bias, rather than genuine differences in perception. Using a paradigm in which ease to block a ball impacts estimated speed of the ball, participants were given explicit feedback about their perceptual judgements to test the response bias alternative. Despite the feedback, the action-specific effect still persisted, thus ruling out a response-bias interpretation. Coupled with other research ruling out additional alternative explanations, the current findings offer an important step towards the claim that a person's ability to act truly influences spatial perception.

Action potential influences spatial perception: Evidence for genuine top-down effects on perception

The action-specific account of spatial perception asserts that a perceiver's ability to perform an action, such as hitting a softball or walking up a hill, impacts the visual perception of the target object. Although much evidence is consistent with this claim, the evidence has been challenged as to whether perception is truly impacted, as opposed to the responses themselves. These challenges have recently been organized as six pitfalls that provide a framework with which to evaluate the empirical evidence. Four case studies of action-specific effects are offered as evidence that meets the framework's high bar, and thus that demonstrates genuine perceptual effects. That action influences spatial perception is evidence that perceptual and action-related processes are intricately and bidirectionally linked.