Tool Use Affects Perceived Distance, But Only When You Intend to Use It.

Witt, Jessica K.; Proffítt, Dennis R.; Epstein, William

doi:10.1037/0096-1523.31.5.880

Cited by 340 publications

(446 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

412

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Wearing a heavy backpack, while known to modulate perceived steepness (Bhalla & Proffitt, 1999) and distance (Proffitt et al, 2004), as well as locomotor imagery (Decety et al, 1989), did not appear to influence the representation of near space. This specificity is consistent with findings that active wielding of a tool, rather than passive holding, is needed to alter perception (e.g., Farnè & Làdavas, 2000;Witt, Proffitt, & Epstein, 2005), as well as with our previous finding that the size of near space is systematically related to arm length (Longo & Lourenco, 2007). It should be noted that although participants did not directly interact with the stimuli (lines) to be bisected (always responding via a laser pointer), the wrist weight manipulation in the present study can nevertheless be considered active in nature.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

The plasticity of near space: Evidence for contraction

Lourenco

Longo

2009

Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The distinction between near space and the space farther away has been well established, as has the relation of this distinction to arm length. Recent studies provide evidence for the plasticity of near space, showing that it is possible to expand its extent ("size") through tool-use. In the present study, we examine the converse effect, whether contraction of near space results from increasing the effort involved on a line bisection task. Adult participants bisected lines at different distances, while, in some cases, wearing weights. In Experiment 1, the arms, specifically, were weighted (wrist weights), and in Experiment 2, more general body weights were used (heavy backpack). As in previous studies, unencumbered participants showed leftward bias when bisecting lines at the closest distances and a rightward shift in bias with increasingly farther distances. With wrist weights, but not a heavy backpack, participants showed more rightward bias at the closest distances, and a more gradual rightward shift with increasing distance, as if the nearest locations were represented as being farther away. These results suggest that increased effort, when specifically related to the arm, can serve to reduce the size of near space, providing support for the generally symmetrical plasticity of near space representations.Plasticity of Near Space 3

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

The plasticity of near space: Evidence for contraction

Lourenco

Longo

2009

Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Before proceeding, we note that although we have followed previous research in referring to the differences in spatial memory between manual and visual conditions as interaction-driven compression (e.g., Bloesch et al, 2012;Davoli et al, 2012;Witt & Proffitt, 2008;Witt et al, 2005), it is conceptually possible that noninteractive study instead leads to a relative expansion of space in memory. While the scaled maps of Experiment 1 did not allow us to directly address this possibility, we can address this alternative account in Experiment 2.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A variety of methodological paradigms have shown that interacting with objects causes observers to underestimate body-to-object distances when making real-time judgments about the distance of single objects from a fixed point of observation (Bloesch, Davoli, Roth, Brockmole, & Abrams, 2012;Davoli et al, 2012;Witt & Proffitt, 2008;Witt et al, 2005). Following interaction with an object, observers also underestimate their remembered body-to-object distance .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, athletes who are playing well recall larger goals and slower ball dynamics (e.g., Witt & Dorsch, 2009;Witt & Sugovic, 2010), people in chronic pain perceive farther distances between objects , and people with stronger grip strength judge their hands to be larger (Linkenauger, Witt, Bakdash, Stefanucci, & Proffitt, 2009). Interactions with objects also carry with them distortions of perceived space: An object that is out of arm's reach looks closer to a person who can interact with it using a tool (e.g., Davoli, Brockmole, & Witt, 2012;Witt & Proffitt, 2008;Witt, Proffitt, & Epstein, 2005). Collectively, results like these have given rise to the actionspecific account of perception (Witt, 2011), which posits that optical information is scaled relative to an observer's ability to act on objects in the visual field, whether that ability is derived from native skill or tool use.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interacting with objects compresses environmental representations in spatial memory

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People perceive individual objects as being closer when they have the ability to interact with the objects than when they do not. We asked how interaction with multiple objects impacts representations of the environment. Participants studied multiple-object layouts, by manually exploring or simply observing each object, and then drew a scaled version of the environment (Exp. 1) or reconstructed a copy of the environment and its boundaries (Exp. 2) from memory. The participants who interacted with multiple objects remembered these objects as being closer together and reconstructed smaller environment boundaries than did the participants who looked without touching. These findings provide evidence that action-based perceptual distortions endure in memory over a moving observer's multiple interactions, compressing not only representations between touched objects, but also untouched environmental boundaries.

show abstract

“…As previously discussed, the selected perceptual ruler depends on the aspect of the body relevant for acting; for example, when reaching for objects, arm length is the relevant structure of the body's morphology. In reaching, the action boundary is the point in space at which an object is just reachable and the space within the action boundary is defined as near space (Witt, Proffitt, & Epstein, 2005). Neural evidence demonstrates that the brain maps near space to include objects that are within arm's reach.…”

Section: Morphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Socio-Ecological Approach to Perception

Gross

Proffítt

2014

PSYCHOLOGIA -An International Journal of Psychological Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our conscious visual experience of the environment is derived from optical information consisting of an ever-changing distribution of light specified in angular units. To transform these units into linear spatial units appropriate for the specification of spatial extents, the visual system needs geometry and a ruler to scale the information. We review the evidence that perceptual rulers derive from the body's phenotype, which is comprised of our morphology, physiology, and behavioral repertoire. We then propose that perception is also scaled relative to the socioecological environment. In this account, social resources affect perception by extending or contracting the relevant physiological ruler. Additionally, we suggest the human ecology functions to select the relevant perceptual ruler. Finally, we highlight research on individual differences as a useful method to further investigate these issues. In moving forward, a complete account of visual perception must necessarily include the socio-ecological environment.eey wodss: K visual perception, social resources, perceptual scaling, socio-ecological environmentThe information for visual perception consists of optic flow and ocular-motor adjustments, both of which consist of angular units. In order to transform these angular units into linear units appropriate for the perception of distance and size, the visual system must make use of geometry and rulers. Our embodied approach to perception contends that the body's phenotype, consisting of morphology, physiology, and behavior, provides the rulers by which spatial perceptions are scaled (Proffitt & Linkenauger, 2013). Depending on one's goals in a particular environment, different aspects of the body become relevant perceptual rulers. Picking up an object, for example, makes hand size relevant, whereas reaching to a location implicates arm's length. In the current paper, we review our embodied approach to perception, and in particular, discuss how walkable extents are scaled to the physiological resources required to traverse the extent. We then consider how social resources function to augment or deplete the resources available for locomotion, and thereby, contribute to the scaling of walkable extents. Given the inherent variability in peoples' phenotypes, we favor an individual differences approach to investigating socioecological effects in perception.

show abstract

Tool Use Affects Perceived Distance, But Only When You Intend to Use It.

Cited by 340 publications

References 34 publications

The plasticity of near space: Evidence for contraction

The plasticity of near space: Evidence for contraction

Interacting with objects compresses environmental representations in spatial memory

A Socio-Ecological Approach to Perception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About