Results 1 - 10
of
14
Reach for what you like: The body’s role in shaping preferences
- Emotion Review
, 2009
"... People often make judgments about the valence, pleasantness, or likeability of objects and other stimuli they encounter. These judgments can occur even before a stimulus is processed for meaning (Zajonc, 1980). But, what drives people’s judgments of how much they like an object or how pleasant they ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 15 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
People often make judgments about the valence, pleasantness, or likeability of objects and other stimuli they encounter. These judgments can occur even before a stimulus is processed for meaning (Zajonc, 1980). But, what drives people’s judgments of how much they like an object or how pleasant they deem it to be? Preferences for one object over another have been shown to be based on perceptual features such as symmetry, high figure-ground contrast, object size, and typicality. Moreover, previous experience interacting with an object can increase the perceptual ease or fluency of processing it, which in turn increases positive affect towards the item in question (for a review, see Reber, Schwarz, & Winkielman, 2004). In the current work we review and introduce evidence that preference and valence judgments about stimuli in one’s envi-ronment are also driven, at least in part, by the motor system.
Hand position alters vision by biasing processing through different visual pathways. Manuscript submitted for publication
, 2011
"... a b s t r a c t The present study investigated the mechanisms responsible for the difference between visual processing of stimuli near and far from the observer's hands. The idea that objects near the hands are immediate candidates for action led us to hypothesize that vision near the hands wo ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 6 (3 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
a b s t r a c t The present study investigated the mechanisms responsible for the difference between visual processing of stimuli near and far from the observer's hands. The idea that objects near the hands are immediate candidates for action led us to hypothesize that vision near the hands would be biased toward the action-oriented magnocellular visual pathway that supports processing with high temporal resolution but low spatial resolution. Conversely, objects away from the hands are not immediate candidates for action and, therefore, would benefit from a bias toward the perception-oriented parvocellular visual pathway that supports processing with high spatial resolution but low temporal resolution. We tested this hypothesis based on the psychophysical characteristics of the two pathways. Namely, we presented subjects with two tasks: a temporal-gap detection task which required the high temporal acuity of the magnocellular pathway and a spatial-gap detection task that required the spatial acuity of the parvocellular pathway. Consistent with our prediction, we found better performance on the temporal-gap detection task and worse performance on the spatial-gap detection task when stimuli were presented near the hands compared to when they were far from the hands. These findings suggest that altered visual processing near the hands may be due to changes in the contribution of the two visual pathways.
Analysis and review of
- Landman Economics, prepared for Action on Smoking and Health; 2011. et al. BMC Public Health 2013, 13:18 Page 7 of 7
"... doi:10.1093/qjmed/hci018 ..."
(Show Context)
Dissociation between goal-directed and discrete response localization in a patient with bilateral cortical blindness
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
, 2013
"... ■ We investigated localization performance of simple targets in patient TN, who suffered bilateral damage of his primary visual cortex and shows complete cortical blindness. Using a two-alternative forced-choice paradigm, TN was asked to guess the position of left–right targets with goal-directed an ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
■ We investigated localization performance of simple targets in patient TN, who suffered bilateral damage of his primary visual cortex and shows complete cortical blindness. Using a two-alternative forced-choice paradigm, TN was asked to guess the position of left–right targets with goal-directed and discrete manual responses. The results indicate a clear dissociation be-tween goal-directed and discrete responses. TN pointed toward the correct target location in approximately 75 % of the trials but was at chance level with discrete responses. This indicates that the residual ability to localize an unseen stimulus depends critically on the possibility to translate a visual signal into a goal-directed motor output at least in certain forms of blindsight. ■
The Mechanisms of Involuntary Attention
"... response-decision mechanism, and (3) a serial-search mechanism. Experiment 1 used a response deadline technique to compare the perceptual enhancement and the decision mechanisms and found evidence consistent with the decision mechanism. Experiment 2 used a multiple-targets paradigm to compare the de ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
response-decision mechanism, and (3) a serial-search mechanism. Experiment 1 used a response deadline technique to compare the perceptual enhancement and the decision mechanisms and found evidence consistent with the decision mechanism. Experiment 2 used a multiple-targets paradigm to compare the decision and serial-search mechanisms. The results favored the decision mechanism. Experiment 3, which varied the display size and whether distractors were present in the display, found that when locating the target was easy, the results conformed to the decision mechanism. However, when locating the target was difficult, the serial-search mechanism was favored. Thus, there appears to be at least 2 mechanisms of involuntary attention. The serial-search mechanism accounts for involuntary attention when the target is difficult to locate, whereas the decision mechanism accounts for results when the target is easy to locate.
Multisensory Integration With a Head-Mounted Display: Sound Delivery and Self-Motion
"... Objective: We tested whether the method of sound delivery affects people’s ability to integrate information from multiple modalities when they are walking and using a headmounted display (HMD). Background: HMDs increasingly support mobile work. Human operators may benefit from auditory support when ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Objective: We tested whether the method of sound delivery affects people’s ability to integrate information from multiple modalities when they are walking and using a headmounted display (HMD). Background: HMDs increasingly support mobile work. Human operators may benefit from auditory support when using an HMD. However, it is unclear whether sound is better delivered publicly in free field or privately via earpiece and what the effect of walking is. Method: Participants identified mismatches between sounds and visual information on an HMD. Participants heard the sounds via either earpiece or free field while they either sat or walked about the test room. Results: When using an earpiece, participants performed the mismatch task equally well whether sitting or walking, but when using free-field sound, participants performed the task significantly worse when walking than when sitting (p =.006). Conclusion: The worse performance for participants using free-field sound while walking may relate to spatial and motion inconsistencies between visual events on the head-referenced HMD and auditory events from world-referenced speakers. Researchers should more frequently examine the effect of self-motion on people’s ability to perform various multisensory tasks. Application: When multisensory integration tasks are performed with an HMD and free-field delivery of sound, as may happen in medicine, transportation, or industry, performance may suffer when the relative location of sound changes as the user moves.
Send Correspondences to:
"... We tested three mechanisms of involuntary attention: (1) a perceptualenhancement mechanism, (2) a response-decision mechanism, (3) a serial-search mechanism. Experiment 1 used a response deadline technique to compare the perceptual enhancement and the decision mechanisms and found evidence consisten ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We tested three mechanisms of involuntary attention: (1) a perceptualenhancement mechanism, (2) a response-decision mechanism, (3) a serial-search mechanism. Experiment 1 used a response deadline technique to compare the perceptual enhancement and the decision mechanisms and found evidence consistent with the decision mechanism. Experiment 2 used a multiple-targets paradigm to compare the decision and serial-search mechanisms. The results favored the decision mechanism. Experiment 3, which varied the display size and whether distractors were present in the display or not, found that when locating the target was easy, the results conformed to the decision mechanism. However, when locating the target was difficult, the serial-search mechanism was favored. Thus, there appears to be at least two mechanisms of involuntary attention. The serialsearch mechanism accounts for involuntary attention when the target is difficult to locate, whereas the decision mechanism accounts for results when the target is easy to locate.
