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.