Cargando…
Contributions of expected sensory and affective action effects to action selection and performance: Evidence from forced- and free-choice tasks
Whereas ideomotor approaches to action control emphasize the importance of sensory action effects for action selection, motivational approaches emphasize the role of affective action effects. We used a game-like experimental setup to directly compare the roles of sensory and affective action effects...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5486880/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27519674 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1139-x |
_version_ | 1783246351195176960 |
---|---|
author | Hommel, Bernhard Lippelt, Dominique P. Gurbuz, Ermine Pfister, Roland |
author_facet | Hommel, Bernhard Lippelt, Dominique P. Gurbuz, Ermine Pfister, Roland |
author_sort | Hommel, Bernhard |
collection | PubMed |
description | Whereas ideomotor approaches to action control emphasize the importance of sensory action effects for action selection, motivational approaches emphasize the role of affective action effects. We used a game-like experimental setup to directly compare the roles of sensory and affective action effects in selecting and performing reaching actions in forced- and free-choice tasks. The two kinds of action effects did not interact. Action selection and execution in the forced-choice task were strongly impacted by the spatial compatibility between actions and the expected sensory action effects, whereas the free-choice task was hardly affected. In contrast, action execution, but not selection, in both tasks was strongly impacted by the spatial compatibility between actions and highly valued action effects. This pattern suggests that sensory and affective action effects serve different purposes: The former seem to dominate rule-based action selection, whereas the latter might serve to reduce any remaining action uncertainty. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1139-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5486880 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54868802017-07-17 Contributions of expected sensory and affective action effects to action selection and performance: Evidence from forced- and free-choice tasks Hommel, Bernhard Lippelt, Dominique P. Gurbuz, Ermine Pfister, Roland Psychon Bull Rev Brief Report Whereas ideomotor approaches to action control emphasize the importance of sensory action effects for action selection, motivational approaches emphasize the role of affective action effects. We used a game-like experimental setup to directly compare the roles of sensory and affective action effects in selecting and performing reaching actions in forced- and free-choice tasks. The two kinds of action effects did not interact. Action selection and execution in the forced-choice task were strongly impacted by the spatial compatibility between actions and the expected sensory action effects, whereas the free-choice task was hardly affected. In contrast, action execution, but not selection, in both tasks was strongly impacted by the spatial compatibility between actions and highly valued action effects. This pattern suggests that sensory and affective action effects serve different purposes: The former seem to dominate rule-based action selection, whereas the latter might serve to reduce any remaining action uncertainty. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1139-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2016-08-12 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5486880/ /pubmed/27519674 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1139-x Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Brief Report Hommel, Bernhard Lippelt, Dominique P. Gurbuz, Ermine Pfister, Roland Contributions of expected sensory and affective action effects to action selection and performance: Evidence from forced- and free-choice tasks |
title | Contributions of expected sensory and affective action effects to action selection and performance: Evidence from forced- and free-choice tasks |
title_full | Contributions of expected sensory and affective action effects to action selection and performance: Evidence from forced- and free-choice tasks |
title_fullStr | Contributions of expected sensory and affective action effects to action selection and performance: Evidence from forced- and free-choice tasks |
title_full_unstemmed | Contributions of expected sensory and affective action effects to action selection and performance: Evidence from forced- and free-choice tasks |
title_short | Contributions of expected sensory and affective action effects to action selection and performance: Evidence from forced- and free-choice tasks |
title_sort | contributions of expected sensory and affective action effects to action selection and performance: evidence from forced- and free-choice tasks |
topic | Brief Report |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5486880/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27519674 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1139-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hommelbernhard contributionsofexpectedsensoryandaffectiveactioneffectstoactionselectionandperformanceevidencefromforcedandfreechoicetasks AT lippeltdominiquep contributionsofexpectedsensoryandaffectiveactioneffectstoactionselectionandperformanceevidencefromforcedandfreechoicetasks AT gurbuzermine contributionsofexpectedsensoryandaffectiveactioneffectstoactionselectionandperformanceevidencefromforcedandfreechoicetasks AT pfisterroland contributionsofexpectedsensoryandaffectiveactioneffectstoactionselectionandperformanceevidencefromforcedandfreechoicetasks |