Searching for Memory Systems

The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between the affordance effect (i.e., the advantage for responses corresponding spatially with the location of an object's graspable part) and the Simon effect (i.e., the advantage for responses corresponding spatially with stimulus location) and to assess whether they both occur at the response selection stage. In two experiments participants were required to respond according to the vertical orientation (upward or inverted) of photographs of graspable objects, located to the left or right of fixation, with their handles oriented to the right or left. In Experiment 1 the response was a buttonpress; in Experiment 2 was a reaching movement. Our results showed that both Simon and affordance effects emerged in response times but not in movement times. In Experiment 1, the two effects did not interact, whereas a clear interaction emerged in Experiment 2. These results seem to suggest that the interaction between Simon and affordance effects may depend on the type of required action.     

Correspondence effects with torches: Grasping affordance or visual feature asymmetry?

Three experiments were conducted to determine whether an object-based correspondence effect for torch (flashlight) stimuli reported by Pellicano et al. [(2010 Pellicano, A., Iani, C., Borghi, A. M., Rubichi, S., & Nicoletti, R. (2010). Simon-like and functional affordance effects with tools: The effects of object perceptual discrimination and object action state. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 2190–2201. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2010.486903[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). Simon-like and functional affordance effects with tools: The effects of object perceptual discrimination and object action state. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 2190–2201] is due to a grasping affordance provided by the handle or asymmetry of feature markings on the torch. In Experiment 1 the stimuli were the same as those from Pellicano et al.'s Experiment 2, whereas in Experiments 2 and 3 the stimuli were modified versions with the graspable handle removed. Participants in all experiments performed upright/inverted orientation judgements on the torch stimuli. The results of Experiment 1 replicated those of Pellicano et al.: A small but significant object-based correspondence effect was evident, mainly when the torch was in an active state. With the handle of the torch removed in Experiment 2, making the barrel markings more asymmetric in the display, the correspondence effect was larger. Experiment 3 directly demonstrated an effect of barrel-marking asymmetry on the correspondence effect: When only the half of the markings nearest the light end of the torch was included, the correspondence effect reversed to favour the light end. The results are in agreement with a visual feature-asymmetry account and are difficult to reconcile with a grasping-affordance account.     

Action priming by briefly presented objects

Three experiments investigated how visual objects prime the actions they afford. The principal concern was whether such visuomotor priming depends upon a concurrent visual input--as would be expected if it is mediated by on-line dorsal system processes. Experiment 1 showed there to be essentially identical advantages for making afforded over non-afforded responses when these were made to objects still in view and following brief (30 or 50 ms) object exposures that were backward masked. Experiment 2 showed that affordance effects were also unaffected by stimulus degradation. Finally, Experiment 3 showed there to be statistically equal effects from images of objects and their names. The results suggest that an active object representation is sufficient to generate affordance compatibility effects based on associated actions, whether or not the object is concurrently visible.     

Dissociating Simon and affordance compatibility effects: Silhouettes and photographs

When a graspable object’s handle is oriented to the same side as the response hand, responses are quicker and more accurate than when it is oriented to the opposite side. This effect has been attributed to the affordance of the object’s handle (Tucker & Ellis, 1998). Recent findings suggest this effect results instead from an abstract spatial response code (i.e., Simon effect; Cho & Proctor, 2010). However, the stimuli used in these previous studies differ in the amount of object and environmental depth information they contain, which may be critical to conveying an affordance. This information could explain these disparate findings as well as dissociate Simon and affordance compatibility effects. Four experiments demonstrate that the Simon effect results from the absence of this information, as in a silhouette, and the affordance effect results from its presence, as in a photograph. A fifth experiment confirmed that modifying information associated with the affordance, rather than the modification itself, produced the effects observed in the previous experiments. These findings support the following: (a) the internal details of an object and environmental depth can dissociate Simon and affordance compatibility effects, (b) this information is necessary to convey the object’s graspable affordance, and (c) the outer shape of the object is not sufficient to elicit an affordance effect. These findings are discussed in relation to the theory of embodied cognition.     

基于客体的空间一致性效应:功能可见性或空间位置编码?

采用空间Simon任务范式,考察基于客体空间一致性效应到底是手柄的功能可见性引起,还是其空间位置编码导致。实验1采用Pellicano等(2010)研究中的带手柄电筒,要求被试完成与抓握功能相关的形状判断任务,结果表明,唯有当电筒开时,被试产生了基于客体的空间一致性效应。实验2去除电筒可抓握的手柄,发现无论电筒开或关,均出现了更大的基于客体空间一致性效应。上述结果与空间编码假说一致,表明空间位置编码是产生基于客体空间一致性效应的原因。     

Motor inhibition associated with the affordance of briefly displayed objects

Research has demonstrated that left- and right-hand responses are facilitated when they are performed with the hand compatible with the orientation of a viewed object. This suggests that graspable objects automatically activate the motor representations that correspond to their orientation. It has recently been proposed that similar positive stimulus–response compatibility effects (PCE) may turn into negative compatibility effects (NCE) when a prime object is displayed very briefly. These NCEs are suggested to reflect motor inhibition mechanisms—motor activation triggered by briefly viewed objects may be treated by the motor system as unwanted, and thus it is rapidly inhibited. We examined whether the motor activation triggered by the orientation of a task-irrelevant object is similarly inhibited when the object is displayed briefly. In Experiment 1, a NCE was observed between the orientation of an object and the responding hand when the object was displayed for 30 or 70 ms. The effect turned into a PCE when the object was displayed for 370 ms. Experiment 2 confirmed that this motor inhibition effect was produced by the handle affordance of the object rather than some abstract visual properties of the object.     

Further evidence that object-based correspondence effects are primarily modulated by object location not by grasping affordance

Tipper, Paul and Hayes found object-based correspondence effects for door-handle stimuli for shape judgments but not colour. They reasoned that a grasping affordance is activated when judging dimensions related to a grasping action (shape), but not for other dimensions (colour). Cho and Proctor, however, found the effect with respect to handle position when the bases of the door handles were centred (so handles were positioned left or right; the base-centred condition) but not when the handles were centred (the object-centred condition), suggesting that the effect is driven by object location, not grasping affordance. We conducted an independent replication of Cho and Proctor's design, but with behavioural and event-related potential measures. Participants made shape judgments in Experiment 1 and colour judgments in Experiment 2 on the same door-handle objects. Correspondence effects on response time and errors were obtained in both experiments for the base-centred condition but not the object-centred condition. Effects were absent in the P1 and N1 data, which are consistent with the hypothesis of little binding between visual processing of grasping component and action. These findings question the grasping-affordance view but support a spatial-coding view, suggesting that correspondence effects are modulated primarily by object location.     

Conflict in object affordance revealed by grip force

Viewing objects can result in automatic, partial activation of motor plans associated with them—“object affordance”. Here, we recorded grip force simultaneously from both hands in an object affordance task to investigate the effects of conflict between coactivated responses. Participants classified pictures of objects by squeezing force transducers with their left or right hand. Responses were faster on trials where the object afforded an action with the same hand that was required to make the response (congruent trials) compared to the opposite hand (incongruent trials). In addition, conflict between coactivated responses was reduced if it was experienced on the preceding trial, just like Gratton adaptation effects reported in “conflict” tasks (e.g., Eriksen flanker). This finding suggests that object affordance demonstrates conflict effects similar to those shown in other stimulus–response mapping tasks and thus could be integrated into the wider conceptual framework on overlearnt stimulus–response associations. Corrected erroneous responses occurred more frequently when there was conflict between the afforded response and the response required by the task, providing direct evidence that viewing an object activates motor plans appropriate for interacting with that object. Recording continuous grip force, as here, provides a sensitive way to measure coactivated responses in affordance tasks.     

Separate Pathways for the Processing of Affordance of Neutral and Dangerous Object

Previous studies have shown that observation of object automatically elicits the activation of a reach-to-grasp response specifically directed to interact with the object, which is termed affordance. Recent findings provide evidences that even dangerous objects can evoke aversive affordances. However, these studies only focused on avoidance effect emerged with dangerous objects. It remains unclear whether the neutral object and dangerous object share a common mechanism for the processing of affordance information. The affordance effect is considered to be a type of conflict between the afforded response and the response required by the task. In a symbol judgment task, we simultaneously presented the neutral object and dangerous object to investigate whether the congruency sequence effects (congruency effects following incongruent trials are smaller than those following congruent trials) occurred across the two types of affordance conflict, which is typically assumed that such flexible adjustments can only be observed between the same conflict types. It was found that congruency sequence effects were only generated between the same types of affordance conflict (e.g., neutral object or dangerous object), but not between two different affordance conflict types (e.g., neutral object and dangerous object). These results indicate there may be two different pathways for the processing of affordance of the neutral and dangerous object.     

Vision-for-action: The effects of object property discrimination and action state on affordance compatibility effects

When a person views an object, the action the object evokes appears to be activated independently of the person’s intention to act. We demonstrate two further properties of this vision-to-action process. First, it is not completely automatic, but is determined by the stimulus properties of the object that are attended. Thus, when a person discriminates the shape of an object, action affordance effects are observed; but when a person discriminates an object’s color, no affordance effects are observed. The former, shape property is associated with action, such as how an object might be grasped; the latter, color property is irrelevant to action. Second, we also show that the action state of an object influences evoked action. Thus, active objects, with which current action is implied, produce larger affordance effects than passive objects, with which no action is implied. We suggest that the active object activates action simulation processes similar to those proposed in mirror systems.     

Flanker and Simon effects interact at the response selection stage

The present study aimed at investigating the processing stage underlying stimulus–stimulus (S–S) congruency effects by examining the relation of a particular type of congruency effect (i.e., the flanker effect) with a stimulus–response (S–R) spatial correspondence effect (i.e., the Simon effect). Experiment 1 used a unilateral flanker task in which the flanker also acted as a Simon-like accessory stimulus. Results showed a significant S–S Congruency × S–R Correspondence interaction: An advantage for flanker–response spatially corresponding trials was observed in target–flanker congruent conditions, whereas, in incongruent conditions, there was a noncorresponding trials' advantage. The analysis of the temporal trend of the correspondence effects ruled out a temporal-overlap account for the observed interaction. Moreover, results of Experiment 2, in which the flanker did not belong to the target set, demonstrated that this interaction cannot be attributed to perceptual grouping of the target–flanker pairs and referential coding of the target with respect to the flanker in the congruent and incongruent conditions, respectively. Taken together, these findings are consistent with a response selection account of congruency effects: Both the position and the task-related attribute of the flanker would activate the associated responses. In noncorresponding-congruent trials and corresponding-incongruent trials, this would cause a conflict at the response selection stage.     

Motor inhibition associated with the affordance of briefly displayed objects

Research has demonstrated that left- and right-hand responses are facilitated when they are performed with the hand compatible with the orientation of a viewed object. This suggests that graspable objects automatically activate the motor representations that correspond to their orientation. It has recently been proposed that similar positive stimulus-response compatibility effects (PCE) may turn into negative compatibility effects (NCE) when a prime object is displayed very briefly. These NCEs are suggested to reflect motor inhibition mechanisms--motor activation triggered by briefly viewed objects may be treated by the motor system as unwanted, and thus it is rapidly inhibited. We examined whether the motor activation triggered by the orientation of a task-irrelevant object is similarly inhibited when the object is displayed briefly. In Experiment 1, a NCE was observed between the orientation of an object and the responding hand when the object was displayed for 30 or 70 ms. The effect turned into a PCE when the object was displayed for 370 ms. Experiment 2 confirmed that this motor inhibition effect was produced by the handle affordance of the object rather than some abstract visual properties of the object.     

Space, object, and task selection

Within the field of selective attention, two separate literatures have developed, one examining the effect of selection of objects and another examining the effect of selection of features. The present study bridged these two traditions by examining the compatibility effects generated by two features of attended and unattended nontarget (foil) stimuli. On each trial, participants determined either the identity or the orientation of a visual stimulus. Spatial attention was controlled using cues (presented prior to the target frame) designed to involuntarily capture attention. We independently manipulated the stimulus dimension the participants prepared for and the stimulus dimension on which they actually executed the task. Preparation had little influence on the magnitude of compatibility effects from foil stimuli. For attended stimuli, the stimulus dimension used in executing the task produced large compatibility effects, regardless of whether that dimension was prepared. These and other compatibility effects (e.g., Stroop effects) are discussed in relation to an integrative model of attentional selection. The key assumptions are that (1) selection occurs at three distinct levels (space, object, and task), (2) spatial attention leads to semantic processing of all dimensions, and (3) features do not automatically activate responses unless that object is selected for action.     

Conflict in object affordance revealed by grip force

Viewing objects can result in automatic, partial activation of motor plans associated with them-"object affordance". Here, we recorded grip force simultaneously from both hands in an object affordance task to investigate the effects of conflict between coactivated responses. Participants classified pictures of objects by squeezing force transducers with their left or right hand. Responses were faster on trials where the object afforded an action with the same hand that was required to make the response (congruent trials) compared to the opposite hand (incongruent trials). In addition, conflict between coactivated responses was reduced if it was experienced on the preceding trial, just like Gratton adaptation effects reported in "conflict" tasks (e.g., Eriksen flanker). This finding suggests that object affordance demonstrates conflict effects similar to those shown in other stimulus-response mapping tasks and thus could be integrated into the wider conceptual framework on overlearnt stimulus-response associations. Corrected erroneous responses occurred more frequently when there was conflict between the afforded response and the response required by the task, providing direct evidence that viewing an object activates motor plans appropriate for interacting with that object. Recording continuous grip force, as here, provides a sensitive way to measure coactivated responses in affordance tasks.     

Perceptual differentiation as a source of category effects in object processing: Evidence from naming and object decision

The locus of category effects in picture recognition and naming was examined in two experiments with normal subjects. Subjects carried out object decision (deciding whether the stimulus is a “real” object or not) and naming tasks with pictures of clothing, furniture, fruit, and vegetables. These categories are distinguished by containing either relatively many exemplars with similar perceptual structures (fruit and vegetables;structurally similar categories), or relatively few exemplars with similar perceptual structures (clothing and furniture;structurally dissimilar categories). In Experiment 1, responses to the stimuli from the structurally similar categories were slower than responses to stimuli from the structurally dissimilar categories, and this effect was larger in the naming than in the object decision task. Further, prior object decisions to stimuli from structurally similar categories facilitated their subsequent naming. In Experiment 2, we orthogonally manipulated object decision and naming as prime and target tasks, again with stimuli from the four categories. Category effects, with responses slower to objects from structurally similar categories, were again larger in naming than in object decision, and these category effects in naming were reduced by priming with both naming and object decision. We interpret the data to indicate that category effects in object naming can reflect visually based competition which is reduced by the preactivation of stored structural knowledge for objects.     

Correspondence effects for objects with opposing left and right protrusions

Choice reactions to a property of an object stimulus are often faster when the location of a graspable part of the object corresponds with the location of a keypress response than when it does not, a phenomenon called the object-based Simon effect. Experiments 1-3 examined this effect for variants of teapot stimuli that were oriented to the left or right. Whether keypress responses were made with fingers within the same hand or between different hands was also manipulated. Experiment 1 showed that, for judgments of stimulus color and upright-inverted orientation, the Simon effect for intact teapots occurred in the direction of the spout location and was larger for within- than between-hand response modes. In Experiments 2 and 3, teapots with the handle or spout removed showed separate contributions of each component to the Simon effect. In Experiment 4, we clarified a discrepancy between our findings of object-based Simon effects and a previously reported absence of effect with color judgments for door-handle stimuli. We obtained an object-based Simon effect with respect to handle position when the bases of the door handles were centered but not when the handles were centered. The findings that object-based Simon effects occur with color judgments and when responses are fingers on the same hand are in closer agreement with a location coding account than with a grasping affordance account.     

Recognition memory for object form and object location: An event-related potential study

In this study, the processes associated with retrieving object forms and object locations from working memory were examined with the use of simultaneously recorded event-related potential (ERP) activity. Subjects memorized object forms and their spatial locations and made either object-based or location-based recognition judgments. In Experiment 1, recognition performance was higher for object locations than for object forms. Old responses evoked more positive-going ERP activity between 0.3 and 1.8 sec poststimulus than did new responses. The topographic distribution of these old/new effects in the P300 time interval was task specific, with object-based recognition judgments being associated with anteriorly focused effects and location-based judgments with posteriorly focused effects. Late old/new effects were dominant at right frontal recordings. Using an interference paradigm, it was shown in Experiment 2 that visual representations were used to rehearse both object forms and object locations in working memory. The results of Experiment 3 indicated that the observed differential topographic distributions of the old/new effects in the P300 time interval are unlikely to reflect differences between easy and difficult recognition judgments. More specific effects were obtained for a subgroup of subjects for which the processing characteristics during location-based judgments presumably were similar to those in Experiment 1. These data, together with those from Experiment 1, indicate that different brain areas are engaged in retrieving object forms and object locations from working memory. Further analyses support the view that retrieval of object forms relies on conceptual semantic representation, whereas retrieving object locations is based on structural representations of spatial information. The effects in the later time intervals may play a functional role in post-retrieval processing, such as recollecting information from the study episode or other processes operating on the products of the retrieval process, and presumably are mediated by right frontal cortical areas. The results support the view of functionally dissociable object and spatial visual working memory systems.     

Types and tokens in transsaccadic object identification: effects of spatial position and left-right orientation

What types of representations support our ability to integrate information acquired during one eye fixation with information acquired during the next fixation? In Experiment 1, transsaccadic integration was explored by manipulating whether or not the relative position of a picture of an object was maintained across a saccade. In Experiment 2, the degree to which visual details of a picture are coded in a position-specific representational system was explored by manipulating whether or not both the relative position and the left-right orientation of the picture were maintained across a saccade. Position-specific and nonspecific preview benefits were observed in both experiments. Only the position-specific benefits were influenced by the number of task-relevant pictures presented in the preview display (Experiment 1) and the left-right orientation of the picture presented in the preview display (Experiment 2). The results support a model of transsaccadic integration based on two independent representational systems. One system codes abstract, prestored object types, and the other codes episodic tokens consisting of stimulus properties linked to scene- or configuration-based position markers.     

Attentional focussing and spatial stimulus-response compatibility

Summary The relative functional significance of attention shifts and attentional zooming for the coding of stimulus position in spatial compatibility tasks is demonstrated by proposing and testing experimentally a tentative explanation of the absence of a Simon effect in Experiment 3 of Umiltà and Liotti (1987). It is assumed that the neutral point of the spatial frame of reference for coding spatial position is at the position where attention is focussed immediately before exposition of the stimulus pattern. If a stimulus pattern is exposed to the right or the left of this position a spatial compatibility effect can be observed when the stimulus-response pairing is incompatible. Generalizing from this, one can say that a spatial compatibility effect will be observed if the last step in attentional focussing of the stimulus attribute specifying the response is a horizontal or a vertical attention shift. If the last step in focussing is attentional zooming (change in the representational level attended to), the stimulus pattern is localized at the horizontal and the vertical positions where the last attention shift had positioned the focus. In this case the spatial code is neutral on these dimensions and so no spatial compatibility effect should result. To test this model we conducted two experiments. Experiment 1 replicated the finding of Umiltà and Liotti that there is no Simon effect in the condition with no delay between a positional cue (two small boxes on the left or right of a fixation cross) and the imperative stimulus, whereas in the condition with a delay of 500 ms a Simon effect was observed. In a comparison condition with a single, rather large cue instead of two small boxes (forcing attention to zoom in), no Simon effect was observed under either delay condition. Experiment 2 used a spatial compatibility task proper with the same experimental conditions as Experiment 1. But in contrast to those of Experiment 1, the results show strong compatibility effects in all cue and delay conditions. The absence of a Simon effect in some experimental conditions in Experiment 1 and the presence of a spatial compatibility effect proper in all conditions in Experiment 2 are consistently accounted for with the proposed attentional explanation of spatial coding and spatial compatibility effects.     

The role of attention in the occurrence of the affordance effect

It has been demonstrated that visual objects activate responses spatially corresponding to the orientation (left or right) of their graspable parts. To investigate the role of attention orienting in the generation of this effect, which we will refer to as affordance effect, we ran three experiments in which the target stimulus could either correspond or not with a dynamic event capturing attention. Participants were required to press a left or right key according to the vertical orientation (upward or inverted) of objects presented with their handles oriented to the right or to the left. In Experiments 1 and 2, the objects were located above or below fixation, while in Experiment 3, to assess the contemporary presence of the affordance and Simon effects, the objects were located to the left or right of fixation. The results showed that while the affordance effect, when evident, was always relative to the target object, irrespective of its attentional capturing properties, the Simon effect occurred relative to the event capturing attention. These findings suggest that automatic and controlled processes of visual attention may play a differential role in the occurrence of the two effects.