Scocchia Lisa, Paroli Michela, Stucchi Natale A, Sedda Anna
Department of Psychology, University of Milano-BicoccaMilan, Italy.
Department of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, Heriot-Watt UniversityEdinburgh, United Kingdom.
Front Psychol. 2017 Jul 14;8:1169. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01169. eCollection 2017.
Perception of visual illusions is susceptible to manipulation of their spatial properties. Further, illusions can sometimes affect visually guided actions, especially the movement planning phase. Remarkably, visual properties of objects related to actions, such as affordances, can prime more accurate perceptual judgements. In spite of the amount of knowledge available on affordances and on the influence of illusions on actions (or lack of thereof), virtually nothing is known about the reverse: the influence of action-related parameters on the perception of visual illusions. Here, we tested a hypothesis that the response mode (that can be linked to action-relevant features) can affect perception of the Poggendorff (geometric) and of the Vanishing Point (motion) illusion. We explored the role of hand dominance (right dominant versus left non-dominant hand) and its interaction with stimulus spatial alignment (i.e., congruency between visual stimulus and the hand used for responses). Seventeen right-handed participants performed our tasks with their right and left hands, and the stimuli were presented in regular and mirror-reversed views. It turned out that the regular version of the Poggendorff display generates a stronger illusion compared to the mirror version, and that participants are less accurate and show more variability when they use their left hand in responding to the Vanishing Point. In summary, our results show that there is a marginal effect of hand precision in motion related illusions, which is absent for geometrical illusions. In the latter, attentional anisometry seems to play a greater role in generating the illusory effect. Taken together, our findings suggest that changes in the response mode (here: manual action-related parameters) do not necessarily affect illusion perception. Therefore, although intuitively speaking there should be at least unidirectional effects of perception on action, and possible interactions between the two systems, this simple study still suggests their relative independence, except for the case when the less skilled (non-dominant) hand and arguably more deliberate responses are used.
视觉错觉的感知容易受到其空间属性操纵的影响。此外,错觉有时会影响视觉引导的动作,尤其是运动规划阶段。值得注意的是,与动作相关的物体视觉属性,如可供性,能够引发更准确的感知判断。尽管关于可供性以及错觉对动作的影响(或缺乏这种影响)已有大量知识,但关于相反情况,即与动作相关的参数对视觉错觉感知的影响,实际上却知之甚少。在此,我们测试了一个假设,即反应模式(可与动作相关特征联系起来)会影响对波根多夫(几何)错觉和消失点(运动)错觉的感知。我们探究了利手(右利手与左非优势手)的作用及其与刺激空间对齐方式(即视觉刺激与用于反应的手之间的一致性)的相互作用。17名右利手参与者用右手和左手执行我们的任务,刺激以正常和镜像反转的视图呈现。结果发现,与镜像版本相比,波根多夫展示的正常版本会产生更强的错觉,并且当参与者用左手对消失点错觉做出反应时,准确性更低且变异性更大。总之,我们的结果表明,在与运动相关的错觉中存在手部精度的边际效应,而几何错觉中不存在这种效应。在后一种情况下,注意不对称性似乎在产生错觉效应中起更大作用。综合来看,我们的研究结果表明,反应模式的变化(此处:与手动动作相关的参数)不一定会影响错觉感知。因此,尽管直观地说,感知对动作至少应该存在单向影响,并且两个系统之间可能存在相互作用,但这项简单的研究仍然表明它们相对独立,除非使用不太熟练的(非优势)手且反应可能更刻意的情况。