全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...
PLOS ONE  2013 

The Case of Watson vs. James: Effect-Priming Studies Do Not Support Ideomotor Theory

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0054094

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

In this paper we show that response facilitation in choice reaction tasks achieved by priming the (previously perceived) effect is based on stimulus-response associations rather than on response-effect associations. The reduced key-press response time is not accounted for by earlier established couplings between the key-press movement and its subsequent effect, but instead results from couplings between this effect and the contingent key-release movement. This key-release movement is an intrinsic part of the entire performed response action in each trial of a reaction-time task, and always spontaneously follows the key-press movement. Eliminating the key-release movement from the task leads to the disappearance of the response facilitation, which raises the question whether response-effect associations actually play a role in studies that use the effect-priming paradigm. Together the three experiments presented in the paper cast serious doubts on the claim that action-effect couplings are acquired and utilized by the cognitive system in the service of action selection, and that the priming paradigm by itself can provide convincing evidence for this claim. As a corollary, we question whether the related two-step model for the ideomotor principle holds a satisfying explanation for how anticipation of future states guides action planning. The results presented here may have profound implications for priming studies in other disciplines of psychology as well.

References

[1]  James W (1890) The principles of psychology. New York: MacMillan.
[2]  Greenwald AG (1970) Sensory feedback mechanisms in performance control: with special reference to the ideomotor mechanism. Psychological Review 77: 73–99.
[3]  Prinz W (1997) Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 9: 129–154.
[4]  Hommel B, Müsseler J, Aschersleben G, Prinz W (2001) The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24: 849–878.
[5]  Stock A, Stock C (2004) A short history of ideo-motor action. Psychological Research 68: 176–188.
[6]  Wheeler SC, Petty RE (2001) The effects of stereotype activation on behavior: A review of possible mechanisms. Psychological Bulletin 127(6): 797–826.
[7]  Sebanz N, Knoblich G, Prinz W (2003) Representing others’ actions: just like one’s own? Cognition 88(3): S11–S21.
[8]  Tsai CC, Kuo WJ, Jing JT, Hung DL, Tzeng OJL (2006) A common coding framework in self-other interaction: evidence from joint action task. Experimental Brain Research 175(2): 353–362.
[9]  Iacoboni M (2009) Imitation, Empathy, and Mirror Neurons. Annual Review of Psychology 60: 653–670.
[10]  Brass M, Bekkering H, Prinz W (2001) Movement observation affects movement execution in a simple response task. Acta Psychologica 106: 3–22.
[11]  Wohlschlager A, Gattis M, Bekkering H (2001) Action generation and action perception in imitation: an instance of the ideomotor principle. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 358: 501–515.
[12]  Bird G, Brindley R, Leighton J, Heyes C (2007) General processes, rather than “goals,” explain imitation errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 33(5), 1158–1169.
[13]  Chaminade T, Decety J (2001) A common framework for perception and action: Neuroimaging evidence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24: 879–882.
[14]  Lau HK, Rogers RD, Haggard P, Passingham RE (2004) Attention to intention. Science 302: 1208–1210.
[15]  Sauser EL, Billard AG (2006) Parallel and distributed neural models of the ideomotor principle: An investigation of imitative cortical pathways. Neural Networks 19: 285–298.
[16]  Melcher T, Weidema M, Eenshuistra RM, Hommel B, Gruber O (2008) The neural substrate of the ideomotor principle: An event-related fMRI analysis. NeuroImage 39: 1274–1288.
[17]  Rovee CK, Rovee DT (1969) Conjugate reinforcement in infant exploratory behavior. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 8: 33–39.
[18]  Fagen JW, Rovee CK (1976) Effects of quantitative shifts in a visual reinforce on the instrumental response of infants. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 21: 349–360.
[19]  Hommel B (2003) Planning and representing intentional action. The Scientific World JOURNAL 3: 593–608.
[20]  Elsner B, Hommel B (2004) Contiguity and contingency in action-effect learning. Psychological Research 68: 138–154.
[21]  Elsner B, Hommel B (2001) Effect anticipation and action control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 27(1): 229–240.
[22]  Hommel B (1996) The cognitive representation of action: Automatic integration of perceived action effects. Psychological Research 59: 176–186.
[23]  Herwig A, Prinz W, Waszak F (2007) Two modes of sensorimotor integration in intention-based and stimulus-based actions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 60: 1540–1554.
[24]  Herwig A, Waszak F (2009) Intention and attention in ideomotor learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 62: 219–227.
[25]  Kello CT, Beltz BC, Holden JG, Van Orden GC (2007) The emergent coordination of cognitive function. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 136: 551–568.
[26]  Baayen RH, Davidson DJ, Bates DM (2008) Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language 59(4): 390–412.
[27]  Baayen R, Milin P (2010) Analyzing reaction times. International Journal of Psychological Research 3(2): 12–28.
[28]  Van der Loo MPJ (2010) Distribution based outlier detection for univariate data. Technical Report 10003, Statistics Netherlands, The Hague. http://www.cbs.nl.
[29]  Bretz F, Hothorn T, Westfall P (2010) Multiple comparisons using R. Chapman & Hall/CRC.
[30]  R Core Team (2012) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org/.
[31]  Van der Loo MPJ Extremevalues, an R package for outlier detection in univariate data, R package version 2.1.
[32]  Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D and the R Development Core Team (2012) nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. R package version 3.1–105.
[33]  Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P (2008) Simultaneous Inference in General Parametric Models. Biometrical Journal 50(3): 346–363.
[34]  Watson JB (1913) Psychology as the Behaviorist Views it. Psychological Review 20: 158–177.
[35]  Pavlov IP (1927) Conditioned reflexes. London: Oxford University Press.
[36]  Cox RFA, Smitsman AW (2008) Special section: Towards an embodiment of goals. Theory and Psychology 18(3): 317–339.
[37]  Hommel B (2009) Action control according to TEC (theory of event coding). Psychological Research 73(4): 512–26.
[38]  Yong E (2012) Nobel laureate challenges psychologists to clean up their act: Social-priming research needs “daisy chain” of replication. Nature News, October 3rd.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133