A prominent and influential hypothesis of vision suggests the existence of two separate visual systems within the brain, one creating our perception of the world and another guiding our actions within it. The induced Roelofs effect has been described as providing strong evidence for this perception/action dissociation: When a small visual target is surrounded by a large frame positioned so that the frame's center is offset from the observer's midline, the perceived location of the target is shifted in the direction opposite the frame's offset. In spite of this perceptual mislocalization, however, the observer can accurately guide movements to the target location. Thus, perception is prone to the illusion while actions seem immune. Here we demonstrate that the Roelofs illusion is caused by a frame-induced transient distortion of the observer's apparent midline. We further demonstrate that actions guided to targets within this same distorted egocentric reference frame are fully expected to be accurate, since the errors of target localization will exactly cancel the errors of motor guidance. These findings provide a mechanistic explanation for the various perceptual and motor effects of the induced Roelofs illusion without requiring the existence of separate neural systems for perception and action. Given this, the behavioral dissociation that accompanies the Roelofs effect cannot be considered evidence of a dissociation of perception and action. This indicates a general need to re-evaluate the broad class of evidence purported to support this hypothesized dissociation.
Cognitive judgments about an object's location are distorted by the presence of a large frame offset left or right of an observer's midline. Sensorimotor responses, however, seem immune to this induced Roelofs illusion, with observers able to accurately point to the target's location. These findings have traditionally been used as evidence for a dissociation of the visual processing required for cognitive judgments and sensorimotor responses. However, a recent alternative hypothesis suggests that the behavioral dissociation is expected if the visual system uses a single frame of reference whose origin (the apparent midline) is biased toward the offset frame. The two theories make qualitatively distinct predictions in a paradigm in which observers are asked to indicate the direction symmetrically opposite the target's position. The collaborative findings of two laboratories clearly support the biased-midline hypothesis.
Previous studies have examined the facilitative effects of prior spatial information on target selection for saccadic eye movements. More recently, studies have shown that prior spatial information also influences target selection for smooth pursuit. However, direct comparisons of the effects of prior information on target selection for pursuit and saccades have not been made. To this end, we provided different classes of prior information and measured their effects on target selection for pursuit and saccades. In Experiment 1, we assessed the relative effects of spatial cues (indicating the target stimulus' initial location) and color cues (indicating the target stimulus' color) on eye movement latencies. In Experiment 2, we assessed the effects of motion cues (indicating the target stimulus' direction of motion) in addition to spatial cues. For both pursuit and saccades, we found that spatial cues reduced eye movement latencies more than color cues (Experiment 1). Spatial cues also reduced eye movement latencies more than motion cues (Experiment 2), even for pursuit, despite the fact that stimulus motion is essential for the generation of pursuit eye movements. These results indicate that both pursuit and saccades are affected to a greater degree by spatial information than motion or color information. We suggest that the primacy of spatial information for both pursuit and saccades reflects the importance of spatial attention in selecting the stimulus target for both eye movements.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.