Cargando…

What Are They Up To? The Role of Sensory Evidence and Prior Knowledge in Action Understanding

Explaining or predicting the behaviour of our conspecifics requires the ability to infer the intentions that motivate it. Such inferences are assumed to rely on two types of information: (1) the sensory information conveyed by movement kinematics and (2) the observer's prior expectations – acqu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chambon, Valerian, Domenech, Philippe, Pacherie, Elisabeth, Koechlin, Etienne, Baraduc, Pierre, Farrer, Chlöé
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3041795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21364992
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0017133
_version_ 1782198483026968576
author Chambon, Valerian
Domenech, Philippe
Pacherie, Elisabeth
Koechlin, Etienne
Baraduc, Pierre
Farrer, Chlöé
author_facet Chambon, Valerian
Domenech, Philippe
Pacherie, Elisabeth
Koechlin, Etienne
Baraduc, Pierre
Farrer, Chlöé
author_sort Chambon, Valerian
collection PubMed
description Explaining or predicting the behaviour of our conspecifics requires the ability to infer the intentions that motivate it. Such inferences are assumed to rely on two types of information: (1) the sensory information conveyed by movement kinematics and (2) the observer's prior expectations – acquired from past experience or derived from prior knowledge. However, the respective contribution of these two sources of information is still controversial. This controversy stems in part from the fact that “intention” is an umbrella term that may embrace various sub-types each being assigned different scopes and targets. We hypothesized that variations in the scope and target of intentions may account for variations in the contribution of visual kinematics and prior knowledge to the intention inference process. To test this hypothesis, we conducted four behavioural experiments in which participants were instructed to identify different types of intention: basic intentions (i.e. simple goal of a motor act), superordinate intentions (i.e. general goal of a sequence of motor acts), or social intentions (i.e. intentions accomplished in a context of reciprocal interaction). For each of the above-mentioned intentions, we varied (1) the amount of visual information available from the action scene and (2) participant's prior expectations concerning the intention that was more likely to be accomplished. First, we showed that intentional judgments depend on a consistent interaction between visual information and participant's prior expectations. Moreover, we demonstrated that this interaction varied according to the type of intention to be inferred, with participant's priors rather than perceptual evidence exerting a greater effect on the inference of social and superordinate intentions. The results are discussed by appealing to the specific properties of each type of intention considered and further interpreted in the light of a hierarchical model of action representation.
format Text
id pubmed-3041795
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30417952011-03-01 What Are They Up To? The Role of Sensory Evidence and Prior Knowledge in Action Understanding Chambon, Valerian Domenech, Philippe Pacherie, Elisabeth Koechlin, Etienne Baraduc, Pierre Farrer, Chlöé PLoS One Research Article Explaining or predicting the behaviour of our conspecifics requires the ability to infer the intentions that motivate it. Such inferences are assumed to rely on two types of information: (1) the sensory information conveyed by movement kinematics and (2) the observer's prior expectations – acquired from past experience or derived from prior knowledge. However, the respective contribution of these two sources of information is still controversial. This controversy stems in part from the fact that “intention” is an umbrella term that may embrace various sub-types each being assigned different scopes and targets. We hypothesized that variations in the scope and target of intentions may account for variations in the contribution of visual kinematics and prior knowledge to the intention inference process. To test this hypothesis, we conducted four behavioural experiments in which participants were instructed to identify different types of intention: basic intentions (i.e. simple goal of a motor act), superordinate intentions (i.e. general goal of a sequence of motor acts), or social intentions (i.e. intentions accomplished in a context of reciprocal interaction). For each of the above-mentioned intentions, we varied (1) the amount of visual information available from the action scene and (2) participant's prior expectations concerning the intention that was more likely to be accomplished. First, we showed that intentional judgments depend on a consistent interaction between visual information and participant's prior expectations. Moreover, we demonstrated that this interaction varied according to the type of intention to be inferred, with participant's priors rather than perceptual evidence exerting a greater effect on the inference of social and superordinate intentions. The results are discussed by appealing to the specific properties of each type of intention considered and further interpreted in the light of a hierarchical model of action representation. Public Library of Science 2011-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC3041795/ /pubmed/21364992 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0017133 Text en Chambon et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Chambon, Valerian
Domenech, Philippe
Pacherie, Elisabeth
Koechlin, Etienne
Baraduc, Pierre
Farrer, Chlöé
What Are They Up To? The Role of Sensory Evidence and Prior Knowledge in Action Understanding
title What Are They Up To? The Role of Sensory Evidence and Prior Knowledge in Action Understanding
title_full What Are They Up To? The Role of Sensory Evidence and Prior Knowledge in Action Understanding
title_fullStr What Are They Up To? The Role of Sensory Evidence and Prior Knowledge in Action Understanding
title_full_unstemmed What Are They Up To? The Role of Sensory Evidence and Prior Knowledge in Action Understanding
title_short What Are They Up To? The Role of Sensory Evidence and Prior Knowledge in Action Understanding
title_sort what are they up to? the role of sensory evidence and prior knowledge in action understanding
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3041795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21364992
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0017133
work_keys_str_mv AT chambonvalerian whataretheyuptotheroleofsensoryevidenceandpriorknowledgeinactionunderstanding
AT domenechphilippe whataretheyuptotheroleofsensoryevidenceandpriorknowledgeinactionunderstanding
AT pacherieelisabeth whataretheyuptotheroleofsensoryevidenceandpriorknowledgeinactionunderstanding
AT koechlinetienne whataretheyuptotheroleofsensoryevidenceandpriorknowledgeinactionunderstanding
AT baraducpierre whataretheyuptotheroleofsensoryevidenceandpriorknowledgeinactionunderstanding
AT farrerchloe whataretheyuptotheroleofsensoryevidenceandpriorknowledgeinactionunderstanding