바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.25 No.1
Citation Share

Changing the Perception of Visual Motion by Hand Action

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2013, v.25 no.1, pp.61-73
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2013.25.1.004

(2013). Changing the Perception of Visual Motion by Hand Action. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 25(1), 61-73, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2013.25.1.004
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

Tests show hand movement and hand touch influence the perception of visual motion. However, previous studies tested these two factors independently. This study examined how differently participants might disambiguate ambiguity in visual motion with simultaneous manipulation of hand movement and touch. While participants observed a streaming/bouncing ambiguous motion display, consisting of two disks that moved horizontally, they moved both hands toward each other, along with the two disks, and either returned from the middle or continued, crossing each other, either with or without the hands touching in the middle. The results supported previous studies showing hand crossing induced greater visual streaming perception, while hand touching induced greater visual bouncing perception. However, when both cues conflicted, their effects decreased significantly, suggesting kinesthetic information and cutaneous touch information additionally influence vision. In addition, the results showed hand returning, alone, did not induce visual bouncing perception, suggesting that kinesthetic information may be effective only for motions in which an object moves along a straight or smooth trajectory or only during initiation of the object's motion.

keywords
motion perception, touch sense, crossmodality, 움직임 지각, 촉각지각, 중다감각

Reference

1.

Blake, R., Sobel, K. V., & James, T. W. (2004). Neural synergy between kinetic vision and touch. Psychological Science, 15, 397-402.

2.

Ernst, M. O., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2004). Merging the senses into a robust percept. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 162-169.

3.

Gandevia, S. C., & McCloskey, D. I. (1976). Joint sense, muscle sense, and their combination as position sense, measured at the distal interphalangeal joint of the middle finger. Journal of Physiology, 260, 387-407.

4.

Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

5.

Gottfried, J. A., & Dolan, R. J. (2003). The nose smells what the eye sees: Crossmodal visual facilitation of human olfactory perception. Neuron, 39, 375-386.

6.

Hagen, M. C., Franzén, O., McGlone, F., Essick, G., Dancer, C., & Pardo, J. V. (2002). Tactile motion activates the human middle temporal/V5 (MT/V5) complex. European Journal of Neuroscience, 16, 957-964.

7.

Hu, B., & Knill, D. C. (2010). Kinesthetic information disambiguates visual motion signals. Current Biology, 20, R436-R437.

8.

Jacobs, R. A. (2002). What determines visual cue reliability? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 345-350.

9.

Lederman, S. J., & Klatzky, R. L. (1987). Hand movement: a window into haptic object recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 342-368.

10.

Long, G. M. and T. C. Toppino (2004). Enduring interest in perceptual ambiguity: Alternating views of reversible figures. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 748-768.

11.

Metzger, F. (1953). Gesetze des Sehens. Waldemar Kramer: Frankfurt-am-Main.

12.

Mitsumatsu, H. (2009). Voluntary action affects perception of bistable motion display. Perception, 38, 1522-1535.

13.

Prinz, W. (1990). A common coding approach to perception and action. In O. Neumann & W. Prinz (Eds.), Relationships between perception and action: Current approaches (pp.167-201). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

14.

Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9, 129-154.

15.

Sekuler, R., Sekuler, A. B., & Lau, R. (1997). Sound alters visual motion perception. Nature, 385, 308-308.

16.

Shimojo, S., & Shams, L. (2001). Sensory modalities are not separate modalities: plasticity and interactions. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 11, 505-509.

17.

Watanabe, K. (2001). Crossmodal interaction in humans. Doctor, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California.

18.

Wohlschläger, A. (2000). Visual motion priming by invisible actions. Vision Research, 40, 925-930.

19.

Wolf, J. M., Kluender, K. R., Levi, D. M., Bartoshuk, L. M., Herz, R. S., Klatzky, R. L., Merfeld, D. M. (2009). Sensation & Perception (2 ed.).

20.

Zwickel, J., Grosjean, M., & Prinz, W. (2007). Seeing while moving: measuring the online influence of action on perception. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 1063-1071.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy