Action effect: An attentional boost of action regardless of medium and semantics
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Previous research on the action effect had shown how simple action towards a stimulus can enhance the processing of that stimulus in subsequent visual search task (Buttaccio & Hahn, 2011; Weidler & Abrams, 2014). In four experiments, we investigated whether semantic representation of action word can induce the same attentional boost towards that stimulus and whether the type of action performed can modulate the action effect. In experiment 1, we replicated the same experimental paradigm displayed in previous studies. Participants were first shown an action word cue - “go” or “no”. When the action cue was “go”, participants were to press a designated key, but not to when the action cue was “no”. Next, participants performed a visual search task, in which they reported the orientation of a tilted bar. The target could appear on top of the previously shown prime object (valid), or not (invalid). Reaction times (RTs) to the search task were measure for analysis and comparison, and the action effect had been replicated. In experiment 2, participants were instructed to respond with the keyboard for the action task, and to respond with the joystick for the visual search task. In experiment 3, participants were instructed not to press any key on the onset of prime, and then perform the visual search task to isolate the effect of semantic representation. Lastly, in experiment 4, participants were instructed to press separate keys for “go” and “no” on the onset of prime, and then perform the visual search task. Results indicate that semantic representation alone did not modulate the action effect, regardless of type of action and medium of action.
Abstract
Previous research on the action effect had shown how simple action towards a stimulus can enhance the processing of that stimulus in subsequent visual search task (Buttaccio & Hahn, 2011; Weidler & Abrams, 2014). In four experiments, we investigated whether semantic representation of action word can induce the same attentional boost towards that stimulus and whether the type of action performed can modulate the action effect. In experiment 1, we replicated the same experimental paradigm displayed in previous studies. Participants were first shown an action word cue - “go” or “no”. When the action cue was “go”, participants were to press a designated key, but not to when the action cue was “no”. Next, participants performed a visual search task, in which they reported the orientation of a tilted bar. The target could appear on top of the previously shown prime object (valid), or not (invalid). Reaction times (RTs) to the search task were measure for analysis and comparison, and the action effect had been replicated. In experiment 2, participants were instructed to respond with the keyboard for the action task, and to respond with the joystick for the visual search task. In experiment 3, participants were instructed not to press any key on the onset of prime, and then perform the visual search task to isolate the effect of semantic representation. Lastly, in experiment 4, participants were instructed to press separate keys for “go” and “no” on the onset of prime, and then perform the visual search task. Results indicate that semantic representation alone did not modulate the action effect, regardless of type of action and medium of action.
참고문헌 (45)
- Awh, E., "Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control : A failed theoretical dichotomy", Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(8), pp.437~443 (2012)
- Baker, K. S., "Attention and the readiness for action", Neuropsychologia, 49(12), pp.3303~3313 (2011)
- Bloesch, E. K., "Watch this! Observed tool use affects perceived distance", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(2), pp.177~183 (2012)
- Brainard, D. H., "The psychophysics toolbox", Spatial Vision, 10, pp.433~436 (1997)
- Brascamp, J. W., "Deciding where to attend : Priming of pop-out drives target selection", Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance, 37(6), pp.1700~1707 (2011)
- Brunia, C. H., "Waiting in readiness : Gating in attention and motor preparation", Psychophysiology, 30(4), pp.327~339 (1993)
- Buttaccio, D. R., "The influence of action on visual search: Behavioral response toward stimuli modifies the selection process", Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73(5), pp.1453~1466 (2011)
- Carlisle, N. B., "Attentional templates in visual working memory", Journal of Neuroscience, 31(25), pp.9315~9322 (2011)
- Chun, M. M., "Contextual cueing : Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention", Cognitive Psychology, 36(1), pp.28~71 (1998)
- Craighero, L., "Action for perception : A motor-visual attentional effect", Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance, 25(6), pp.1673~1692 (1999)
- Desimone, R., "Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention", Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18(1), pp.193~222 (1995)
- Deubel, H., "Saccade target selection and object recognition : Evidence for a common attentional mechanism", Vision Research, 36(12), pp.1827~1837 (1996)
- Downing, P. E., "Interactions between visual working memory and selective attention", Psychological Science, 11(6), pp.467~473 (2000)
- Eimer, M., "The neural basis of attentional control in visual search", Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(10), pp.526~535 (2014)
- Fagioli, S., "Intentional control of attention : Action planning primes action-related stimulus dimensions", Psychological Research, 71(1), pp.22~29 (2007)
- Folk, C. L., "Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings", Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance, 18(4), pp.1030~1044 (1992)
- Gladwin, T. E., "Pre-stimulus EEG effects related to response speed, task switching and upcoming response hand", Biological Psychology, 72(1), pp.15~34 (2006)
- Han, S., "Simple action planning can affect attentional allocation in subsequent visual search", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 27(5), pp.1014~1024 (2020)
- Han, S. W., "Do the contents of working memory capture attention? Yes, but cognitive control matters", Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance, 35(5), pp.1292~1302 (2009)
- Handy, T. C., "Graspable objects grab attention when the potential for action is recognized", Nature Neuroscience, 6(4), pp.421~427 (2003)
- Hauk, O., "Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex", Neuron, 41(2), pp.301~307 (2004)
- Hommel, B., "Event files : Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes", Visual Cognition, 5(1-2), pp.183~216 (1998)
- Hommel, B., "Event files : Feature binding in and across perception and action", Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(11), pp.494~500 (2004)
- Hong, I., "Implicit learning of A response-contingent task", Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 84(2), pp.540~552 (2022)
- Hwang, B. W., "Implicit learning of a speed-contingent target feature", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(3), pp.803~808 (2016)
- Ji, E., "Independent operation of implicit working memory under cognitive load", Consciousness and Cognition, 55, pp.214~222 (2017)
- Johnston, W. A., "Selective attention", Annual Review of Psychology, 37(1), pp.43~75 (1986)
- Kristjánsson, Á., "The boundary conditions of priming of visual search : From passive viewing through task-relevant working memory load", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(3), pp.514~521 (2013)
- Maljkovic, V., "Priming of pop-out : I. Role of features", Memory & Cognition, 22(6), pp.657~672 (1994)
- Meyer, D. E., "Attention and performance V", pp.98~118 (1975), Academic Press
- Olivers, C. N., "Different states in visual working memory : When it guides attention and when it does not", Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(7), pp.327~334 (2011)
- Pan, Y., "Working memory biasing of visual perception without awareness", Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76(7), pp.2051~2062 (2014)
- Posner, M. I., "Attention and performance V", pp.669~682 (1975), Academic Press
- Pulvermüller, F., "Brain signatures of meaning access in action word recognition", Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(6), pp.884~892 (2005)
- Remington, R. W., "Involuntary attentional capture by abrupt onsets", Perception & Psychophysics, 51(3), pp.279~290 (1992)
- Robinson, M. M., "The action is in the task set, not in the action", Cognitive Psychology, 100, pp.17~42 (2018)
- Sergent, C., "Cueing attention after the stimulus is gone can retrospectively trigger conscious perception", Current Biology, 23(2), pp.150~155 (2013)
- Suh, J., "Action influences unconscious visual processing", Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80, pp.1599~1608 (2018)
- Thibault, L., "Retrospective attention gates discrete conscious access to past sensory stimuli", PloS One, 11(2), pp.e0148504~ (2016)
- Weidler, B. J., "Decomposing the action effect: How simple actions affect subsequent perception", Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76(4), pp.1242~1252 (2014)
- Weidler, B. J., "Simple actions influence pop-out search", Visual Cognition, 24(7-8), pp.392~405 (2016)
- Weidler, B. J., "Simple actions activate semantic associations", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25, pp.1500~1506 (2018)
- Witt, J. K., "Action’s effect on perception", Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(3), pp.201~206 (2011)
- Wykowska, A., "How you move is what you see : action planning biases selection in visual search", Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance, 35(6), pp.1755~1769 (2009)
- Xia, Y., "Retrospective triggering of conscious perception by an interstimulus interaction", Journal of Vision, 16(7), pp.3~ (2016)