Cargando…

Spatial action–effect binding depends on type of action–effect transformation

Spatial action–effect binding denotes the mutual attraction between the perceived position of an effector (e.g., one’s own hand) and a distal object that is controlled by this effector. Such spatial binding can be construed as an implicit measure of object ownership, thus the belonging of a controll...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liesner, Marvin, Kirsch, Wladimir, Pfister, Roland, Kunde, Wilfried
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7343754/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32130655
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02013-2
_version_ 1783555814384992256
author Liesner, Marvin
Kirsch, Wladimir
Pfister, Roland
Kunde, Wilfried
author_facet Liesner, Marvin
Kirsch, Wladimir
Pfister, Roland
Kunde, Wilfried
author_sort Liesner, Marvin
collection PubMed
description Spatial action–effect binding denotes the mutual attraction between the perceived position of an effector (e.g., one’s own hand) and a distal object that is controlled by this effector. Such spatial binding can be construed as an implicit measure of object ownership, thus the belonging of a controlled object to the own body. The current study investigated how different transformations of hand movements (body-internal action component) into movements of a visual object (body-external action component) affect spatial action–effect binding, and thus implicit object ownership. In brief, participants had to bring a cursor on the computer screen into a predefined target position by moving their occluded hand on a tablet and had to estimate their final hand position. In Experiment 1, we found a significantly lower drift of the proprioceptive position of the hand towards the visual object when hand movements were transformed into laterally inverted cursor movements, rather than cursor movements in the same direction. Experiment 2 showed that this reduction reflected an elimination of spatial action–effect binding in the inverted condition. The results are discussed with respect to the prerequisites for an experience of ownership over artificial, noncorporeal objects. Our results show that predictability of an object movement alone is not a sufficient condition for ownership because, depending on the type of transformation, integration of the effector and a distal object can be fully abolished even under conditions of full controllability.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7343754
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73437542020-07-13 Spatial action–effect binding depends on type of action–effect transformation Liesner, Marvin Kirsch, Wladimir Pfister, Roland Kunde, Wilfried Atten Percept Psychophys Article Spatial action–effect binding denotes the mutual attraction between the perceived position of an effector (e.g., one’s own hand) and a distal object that is controlled by this effector. Such spatial binding can be construed as an implicit measure of object ownership, thus the belonging of a controlled object to the own body. The current study investigated how different transformations of hand movements (body-internal action component) into movements of a visual object (body-external action component) affect spatial action–effect binding, and thus implicit object ownership. In brief, participants had to bring a cursor on the computer screen into a predefined target position by moving their occluded hand on a tablet and had to estimate their final hand position. In Experiment 1, we found a significantly lower drift of the proprioceptive position of the hand towards the visual object when hand movements were transformed into laterally inverted cursor movements, rather than cursor movements in the same direction. Experiment 2 showed that this reduction reflected an elimination of spatial action–effect binding in the inverted condition. The results are discussed with respect to the prerequisites for an experience of ownership over artificial, noncorporeal objects. Our results show that predictability of an object movement alone is not a sufficient condition for ownership because, depending on the type of transformation, integration of the effector and a distal object can be fully abolished even under conditions of full controllability. Springer US 2020-03-04 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7343754/ /pubmed/32130655 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02013-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Liesner, Marvin
Kirsch, Wladimir
Pfister, Roland
Kunde, Wilfried
Spatial action–effect binding depends on type of action–effect transformation
title Spatial action–effect binding depends on type of action–effect transformation
title_full Spatial action–effect binding depends on type of action–effect transformation
title_fullStr Spatial action–effect binding depends on type of action–effect transformation
title_full_unstemmed Spatial action–effect binding depends on type of action–effect transformation
title_short Spatial action–effect binding depends on type of action–effect transformation
title_sort spatial action–effect binding depends on type of action–effect transformation
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7343754/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32130655
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02013-2
work_keys_str_mv AT liesnermarvin spatialactioneffectbindingdependsontypeofactioneffecttransformation
AT kirschwladimir spatialactioneffectbindingdependsontypeofactioneffecttransformation
AT pfisterroland spatialactioneffectbindingdependsontypeofactioneffecttransformation
AT kundewilfried spatialactioneffectbindingdependsontypeofactioneffecttransformation