Anticipating the magnitude of response outcomes can induce a potentiation effect for manipulable objects

Guerineau, Ronan; Heurley, Loïc; Morgado, Nicolas; Brouillet, Denis; Dru, Vincent

doi:10.1007/s00426-021-01535-0

Cited by 9 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to the theory of event coding (Hommel, 2019; Hommel et al, 2001), common coding of stimulus and response would be achieved in the format of a distal code that would be applied to the dimension of size in the compatibility effects observed here. Recently, Guerineau et al (2022) proposed an interpretation based on the magnitude of the sensorial consequences of the action to explain compatibility effects with object size. In our protocol, power grasps and whole-hand touches would have been anticipated as large tactile and/or visual feedbacks and precision grasps and one-finger touches as small tactile and/or visual feedbacks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To our knowledge, only a few very recent studies explicitly evaluated whether abstract coding of object size may be sufficient to induce compatibility effects between the size of visual objects and grasp responses (Guerineau et al, 2022; Harrak et al, 2022; Heurley et al, 2020; Pecher et al, 2019). In the work of Heurley et al (2020), black and white pictures of small and large fruit, and vegetable items that may be graspable with a power or a precision grasp were presented in their actual size.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The role of abstract coding of response size in the emergence of compatibility effects was further evaluated in a control condition. Although the design of the device did not allow size coding of the response parts, it did not prevent the participant to anticipate different magnitudes of action effects (i.e., responding with a power grasp gives more sensorial feedback than responding with a precision grasp), which may also contribute to compatibility effects (Guerineau et al, 2022). The control condition required to respond to the categorisation task on the same device with two distinct touch responses, one involving a large haptic feedback and one involving a small haptic feedback.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Stimulus–response compatibility effects during object semantic categorisation: Evocation of grasp affordances or abstract coding of object size?

Lilas

Wamain

Kalénine

2023

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When the size of visual objects matches the size of the response required to perform the task, a potentiation effect has been reported, with faster responses in compatible than incompatible situations. Size compatibility effects have been taken as evidence of close perception-action interrelations. However, it is still unclear whether the effect arises from abstract coding of the size of stimulus and response or from the evocation of grasp affordances from visual objects. We aimed to disentangle the two interpretations. Two groups of 40 young adults categorised small and large objects presented in standardised size as natural or artefacts objects. One group categorised manipulable objects that may be associated with small or large size properties and evoke power and precision grasp affordances. The other groups categorised non-manipulable objects that may only be associated with small or large size properties. Categorisation responses were made by reaching and grasping a monotonic cylindric device with a power and precision grip in a grasping condition and with large or small touch responses in a control condition. Compatibility effects were found in both grasping and control conditions, independently of the manipulability or category of objects. Participants were faster when the size of the expected response matched the size of the object than when they mismatched, especially for power grasp or whole-hand touch responses. Overall findings support the abstract coding hypothesis and suggest that compatibility between the conceptual size of the object and the size of the hand response is sufficient to facilitate semantic categorization judgements.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stimulus–response compatibility effects during object semantic categorisation: Evocation of grasp affordances or abstract coding of object size?

Lilas

Wamain

Kalénine

2023

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Like the potentiation effect of lateralised responses (Tucker & Ellis, 1998), this effect has been also extensively replicated (for a review, see Osiurak & Badets, 2016) and its embodied interpretation is generally never questioned. However, we recently reported results (Guerineau et al, 2022; Harrak et al, 2022; Heurley et al, 2020) opening on an alternative interpretation that we called the size-coding hypothesis (already developed by Masson, 2015 and Proctor & Miles, 2014; see also Pecher et al, 2019). This view suggests that this potentiation effect is due to an overlap between more abstract codes, the one representing manipulable objects and the one representing response options.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

The visual size is enough to automatically induce the potentiation of grasping behaviours

Heurley

Harrak

Guerineau

et al. 2023

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seeing objects usually grasped with a power or a precision grip (e.g., an apple vs. a cherry) potentiates power-grip and precision-grip responses, respectively. An embodied account suggests that this effect occurs because object conceptual representations would lie on a motor simulation process. A new account, named the size-coding account, argues that this effect could be rather due to an overlapping of size codes used to represent both manipulable objects and response options. In this paper, we investigate whether this potentiation effect could be merely due to a low-level visual feature that favor a size-coding of stimuli: the visual size in which objects are presented. Accordingly, we conducted two experiments in which we presented highly elementary and non-graspable stimuli (i.e., ink spots) either large or small rather than graspable objects. Our results showed that the mere visual size automatically potentiates power- and precision-grip responses that is in line with the size-coding account of the potentiation effect of grasping behaviors. Moreover, these results appeal to improve the methodological control of the size of stimuli especially when researchers try to support the embodied account.

show abstract

“…Importantly, a similar effect is also observed with pictures and with the names of manipulable objects. This suggests that the conceptual processing of manipulable objects activates the related motor pattern which subsequently facilitates the related action (for an alternative account of these effects, see Guerineau et al, 2021; Heurley et al, 2020). Consistently, reading the names of manipulable objects activates the motor system (e.g., Carota et al, 2012; Rueschemeyer et al, 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Postural Effect on the Memory of Manipulable Objects

Dutriaux

Gyselinck

2021

Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The grounded cognition approach posits the involvement of sensory-motor processes in the representation of knowledge. However, the functional impact of these processes on cognition has been questioned, and some authors have explored the effect of motor interference on memory to test causally this hypothesis. In a seminal study, Dutriaux and Gyselinck (2016) showed that keeping the hands behind the back during learning decreases the memory of manipulable objects, but not the memory of nonmanipulable objects. The aim of this paper is to shed light on the mechanism behind the effect of posture in memory observed by Dutriaux and Gyselinck. The present experiment replicated the posture manipulation during learning but asked participants to keep their hands behind the back during recall. Results showed a similar detrimental effect of the hands behind the back specific to manipulable objects. This shows that the mechanism behind this effect arises from postural interference rather than from a compatibility between the posture during learning and the posture during recall and adds new evidence in favor of the sensory-motor grounding of knowledge.

show abstract

Anticipating the magnitude of response outcomes can induce a potentiation effect for manipulable objects

Cited by 9 publications

References 79 publications

Stimulus–response compatibility effects during object semantic categorisation: Evocation of grasp affordances or abstract coding of object size?

Stimulus–response compatibility effects during object semantic categorisation: Evocation of grasp affordances or abstract coding of object size?

The visual size is enough to automatically induce the potentiation of grasping behaviours

The Postural Effect on the Memory of Manipulable Objects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About