Dynamic Simulation and Static Matching for Action Prediction: Evidence From Body Part Priming

Cognitive Science 37 (5):936-952 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Accurately predicting other people's actions may involve two processes: internal real-time simulation (dynamic updating) and matching recently perceived action images (static matching). Using a priming of body parts, this study aimed to differentiate the two processes. Specifically, participants played a motion-controlled video game with either their arms or legs. They then observed arm movements of a point-light actor, which were briefly occluded from view, followed by a static test pose. Participants judged whether this test pose depicted a coherent continuation of the previously seen action (i.e., “action prediction task”). Evidence of dynamic updating was obtained after compatible effector priming (i.e., arms), whereas incompatible effector priming (i.e., legs) indicated static matching. Together, the results support action prediction as engaging two distinct processes, dynamic simulation and static matching, and indicate that their relative contributions depend on contextual factors like compatibility of body parts involved in performed and observed action

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,923

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Neurophysiological evidence for simulation and action.J. Decety - 2002 - In Jérôme Dokic & Joëlle Proust (eds.), Simulation and Knowledge of Action. John Benjamins.
What do we prime? On distinguishing between semantic priming, procedural priming, and goal priming.Jens Forster, Nira Liberman & Ronald S. Friedman - 2008 - In Ezequiel Morsella, John A. Bargh & Peter M. Gollwitzer (eds.), Oxford handbook of human action. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 173--193.
Awareness of action: Inference and prediction.James Moore - 2008 - Consciousness and Cognition 17 (1):136-144.
Reply to Jean Decety: Perceiving actions and understanding agency.Christoph Hoerl - 2002 - In Jerome Dokic & Joelle Proust (eds.), Simulation and Knowledge of Action. John Benjamins. pp. 45--73.
Reply to 'the scope and limit of mental simulation'.Jérôme Dokic - 2002 - In Jérôme Dokic & Joëlle Proust (eds.), Simulation and Knowledge of Action. John Benjamins.
The scope and limit of mental simulation.Pierre Jacob - 2002 - In Jerome Dokic & Joelle Proust (eds.), Simulation and Knowledge of Action. John Benjamins.
Mental simulation and motor imagery.Gregory Currie & Ian Ravenscroft - 1997 - Philosophy of Science 64 (1):161-80.
Action.Donald George Brown - 1968 - London,: Allen & Unwin.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-05-21

Downloads
42 (#389,237)

6 months
5 (#707,850)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?