Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Getting a grasp on action-specific scaling: A response to Witt (2017)
University of Liverpool, UK.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4730-6328
University of Liverpool, UK.
2019 (English)In: Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, ISSN 1069-9384, E-ISSN 1531-5320, Vol. 26, no 1, p. 374-384Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Can higher level cognition directly influence visual spatial perception? Many recent studies have claimed so, on the basis that manipulating cognitive factors (e.g., morality, emotion, action capacity) seems to directly affect perception. However, Firestone and Scholl (Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, 1–77, 2016) argued that such studies often fall prey to at least one of six pitfalls. They further argued that if an effect could be accounted for by any of these pitfalls, it is not a true demonstration of a top-down influence of cognition on perception. In response to Firestone and Scholl (Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, 1–77, 2016), Witt (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(4), 999–1021, 2017) discussed four action-specific scaling effects which, she argued, withstand all six pitfalls and thus demonstrate true perceptual changes caused by differences in action capacity. Her third case study was the influence of apparent grasping capacity on perceived object size. In this article, we provide new interpretations of previous findings and assess recent data which suggest that this effect is not, in fact, perceptual. Instead, we believe that many earlier studies showing this effect are subject to one or more of the pitfalls outlined by Firestone and Scholl (Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, 1–77, 2016). We substantiate our claims with recent empirical evidence from our laboratory which suggests that neither actual nor perceived grasping capacity directly influence perceived object size. We conclude that studies manipulating grasping capacity do not provide evidence for the action-specific account because variation in this factor does not directly influence size perception. © 2018, The Author(s).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer New York LLC , 2019. Vol. 26, no 1, p. 374-384
Keywords [en]
Vision. Action-specific perception. Grasping. Action capacity, cognition, depth perception, hand strength, human, vision, Humans, Space Perception, Visual Perception
National Category
Engineering and Technology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-64198DOI: 10.3758/s13423-018-1511-0Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85053698740OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-64198DiVA, id: diva2:1741907
Note

Funding details: Economic and Social Research Council, ESRC, ES/J500094/1; Funding text 1: This work was supported by a grant from the Economic and Social Research Council to the first author [ES/J500094/1]

Available from: 2023-03-07 Created: 2023-03-07 Last updated: 2023-03-07Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Collier, Elizabeth S

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Collier, Elizabeth S
In the same journal
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
Engineering and Technology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 7 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf