Humans, being highly social creatures, rely heavily on the ability to perceive what others are doing and to infer from gestures and expressions what others may be intending to do. These perceptual skills are easily mastered by most, but not all, people, in large part because human action readily communicates intentions and feelings. In recent years, remarkable advances have been made in our understanding of the visual, motoric, and affective influences on perception of human action, as well as in the elucidation of the neural concomitants of perception of human action. This article reviews those advances and, where possible, draws links among those findings.

Human observers demonstrate impressive visual sensitivity to human movement. What defines this sensitivity? If motor experience influences the visual analysis of action, then observers should be most sensitive to their own movements. If view-dependent visual experience determines visual sensitivity to human movement, then observers should be most sensitive to the movements of their friends. To test these predictions, participants viewed sagittal displays of point-light depictions of themselves, their friends, and strangers performing various actions. In actor identification and discrimination tasks, sensitivity to one's own motion was highest. Visual sensitivity to friends', but not strangers', actions was above chance. Performance was action dependent. Control studies yielded chance performance with inverted and static displays, suggesting that form and low-motion cues did not define performance. These results suggest that both motor and visual experience define visual sensitivity to human action.

Observers viewed pairs of altemating photographs of a human body in different positions. Shortest-path motion solutions were pitted against anatomically possible movements. With short stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs), observers tended to report the shortest path despite violations of anatomical constraints. However, with longer SOAs observers became increasingly likely to report the anatomically possible, bllt longer, paths. Thisfinding, in conjunction with those from a second study, challenges the accepted wisdom that apparent motion paths are independent of the object. Instead, our findings suggest that when given enough time and appropriate stimuli, the visual system prefers at least some object-appropriate apparent motion paths.

No abstract

). A rich source of information lies in the ways that people move their bodies. Research over the last three decades indicates that the visual analysis of bodily movement is sufficient to determine other people's identities (e.g.,