Dynamic prediction during perception of everyday events

The ability to predict what is going to happen in the near future is integral for daily functioning. Previous research suggests that predictability varies over time, with increases in prediction error at those moments that people perceive as boundaries between meaningful events. These moments also tend to be points of rapid change in the environment. Eye tracking provides a method for noninterruptive measurement of prediction as participants watch a movie of an actor performing a series of actions. In two studies, we used eye tracking to study the time course of prediction around event boundaries. In both studies, viewers looked at objects that were about to be touched by the actor shortly before the objects were contacted, demonstrating predictive looking. However, this behavior was modulated by event boundaries: looks to to-be-contacted objects near event boundaries were less likely to be early and more likely to be late compared to looks to objects contacted within events. This result is consistent with theories proposing that event segmentation results from transient increases in prediction error.

[1]  Thomas Martinetz,et al.  Eye Movements Show Optimal Average Anticipation with Natural Dynamic Scenes , 2011, Cognitive Computation.

[2]  J. Henderson Gaze Control as Prediction , 2017, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[3]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Segmentation in reading and film comprehension. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[4]  Jeff B. Pelz,et al.  Predictive eye movements in natural vision , 2011, Experimental Brain Research.

[5]  Marshall M. Haith,et al.  Stability of Visual Expectations at 3.0 Months of Age. , 1990 .

[6]  J. Bittner,et al.  Cognitive Research : Principles and Implications , 2017 .

[7]  Jenny R. Saffran,et al.  Expectancy Learning from Probabilistic Input by Infants , 2013, Front. Psychology.

[8]  R. Goebel,et al.  Local Discriminability Determines the Strength of Holistic Processing for Faces in the Fusiform Face Area , 2013, Front. Psychology.

[9]  B. Tversky,et al.  Making sense of abstract events: Building event schemas , 2006, Memory & cognition.

[10]  Mark Wexler,et al.  Masking the saccadic smear. , 2016, Journal of vision.

[11]  Mary Hayhoe,et al.  Saccades to future ball location reveal memory-based prediction in a virtual-reality interception task. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[12]  Jason Wittenberg,et al.  Clarify: Software for Interpreting and Presenting Statistical Results , 2003 .

[13]  Jeffery. M. Zacks,et al.  Activation of human motion processing areas during event perception , 2003, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[14]  Rick Grush,et al.  The emulation theory of representation: Motor control, imagery, and perception , 2004, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[15]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[16]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Prediction Error Associated with the Perceptual Segmentation of Naturalistic Events , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[17]  Gabriel A Radvansky,et al.  Narrative event boundaries, reading times, and expectation , 2016, Memory & cognition.

[18]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Ambient and focal visual processing of naturalistic activity. , 2016, Journal of vision.

[19]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Temporal changes as event boundaries: Processing and memory consequences of narrative time shifts , 2005 .

[20]  J. Fox Effect Displays in R for Generalised Linear Models , 2003 .

[21]  Darren Newtson Attribution and the unit of perception of ongoing behavior. , 1973 .

[22]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Human Brain Activity Time-Locked to Narrative Event Boundaries , 2007, Psychological science.

[23]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Using movement and intentions to understand simple events , 2004, Cogn. Sci..

[24]  P. Brockhoff,et al.  lmerTest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package) , 2014 .

[25]  Nancy B. Carlisle,et al.  Where do we store the memory representations that guide attention? , 2013, Journal of vision.

[26]  J. Zacks,et al.  Using movement and intentions to understand human activity , 2009, Cognition.

[27]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[28]  R. Johansson,et al.  Action plans used in action observation , 2003, Nature.

[29]  K. Doya Modulators of decision making , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[30]  Harold Bekkering,et al.  The early development of object knowledge: a study of infants' visual anticipations during action observation. , 2010, Developmental psychology.

[31]  E. Halgren,et al.  Top-down facilitation of visual recognition. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[32]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Event perception: a mind-brain perspective. , 2007, Psychological bulletin.