Stimulus-response compatability for moving stimuli: perception of affordances or directional coding?

Michaels reported a compatibility effect in which responses were fastest at the destination of a moving stimulus; she interpreted this "destination" compatibility effect in terms of catching actions "afforded" by the stimulus motion. The present study evaluated implications of the catching-affordance account and compared them with those of an account based on spatial coding of relative direction. The destination compatibility effect was obtained when the responses were keypresses rather that catching movements of a joystick and regardless of whether the stimulus expanded, contracted, or only changed location. This effect was a function of relative rather than absolute location of the responses. A similar compatibility effect was obtained when destinations were designated by static arrow stimuli. The results are inconsistent with the catching-affordance account and are best explained by the coding of relative direction.

[1]  E Donchin,et al.  A metric for thought: a comparison of P300 latency and reaction time. , 1981, Science.

[2]  E. A. Alluisi,et al.  Things That Go Together: A Review of Stimulus-Response Compatibility and Related Effects , 1990 .

[3]  C. Michaels.  S-R compatibility between response position and destination of apparent motion: Evidence of the detection of affordances. , 1988 .

[4]  Robert W. Proctor,et al.  Stimulus-Response Compatibility: An Integrated Perspective , 1990 .

[5]  J. Cutting.  Two Ecological Perspectives: Gibson vs. Shaw and Turvey , 1982 .

[6]  J. Gibson.  The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1979 .

[7]  T. G. Reeve,et al.  On the advance preparation of discrete finger responses. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  R. L. Deininger,et al.  S-R compatibility: correspondence among paired elements within stimulus and response codes. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[9]  H. Heuer,et al.  Perspectives on Perception and Action , 1989 .

[10]  J. G. Hollands,et al.  Engineering Psychology and Human Performance , 1984 .

[11]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Spatial compatibility effects on the same side of the body midline. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  Y. Guiard,et al.  Principles of response determination: The list-rule model of SR compatibility , 1990 .

[13]  R. Proctor,et al.  Salient-features coding in the translation between orthogonal stimulus and response dimensions , 1990 .

[14]  Sherman Ross,et al.  Response preferences in display-control relationships. , 1955 .

[15]  L. G. Gawryszewski,et al.  What is crossed in crossed-hand effects? , 1986 .

[16]  P Cairney,et al.  Spatial relationships and S-R compatibility. , 1972, Acta psychologica.

[17]  Carlo Umiltà,et al.  Egocentric and relative spatial codes in S-R compatibility , 1987 .

[18]  P. Fitts,et al.  S-R compatibility: spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[19]  T. G. Reeve,et al.  A Triphasic Approach to the Acquisition of Response-Selection Skill , 1990 .

[20]  J. Gibson.  The Senses Considered As Perceptual Systems , 1967 .

[21]  J. Lachman,et al.  Cognitive Psychology and Information Processing: An Introduction , 1979 .

[22]  E. Donchin,et al.  On the dependence of P300 latency on stimulus evaluation processes. , 1984, Psychophysiology.

[23]  N E LOVELESS,et al.  Direction-of-motion stereotypes: a review. , 1962, Ergonomics.

[24]  A. T. Welford,et al.  Skilled performance : perceptual and motor skills , 1976 .

[25]  D. A. Grant,et al.  Learning and performance on a key-pressing task as function of the degree of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. , 1955, Journal of experimental psychology.

[26]  Roberto Nicoletti,et al.  Spatial stimulus-response compatibility. , 1990 .

[27]  T. Bashore,et al.  Stimulus-Response Compatibility Viewed from a Cognitiv E Psychophysiological Perspective , 1990 .

[28]  O. Meijer,et al.  Complex movement behaviour : 'the' motor-action controversy , 1988 .

[29]  J. Gibson.  The perception of the visual world , 1951 .

[30]  W H Warren,et al.  Perceiving affordances: visual guidance of stair climbing. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[31]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Spatial compatibility and anatomical factors in simple and choice reaction time , 1977, Neuropsychologia.