When task requirements were known in advance, Glazebrook et al. C.M. Glazebrook, V.P. Dhillon, K.M. Keetch, J. Lyons, E. Amazeen, D.J. Weeks, D. Elliott, Perception–action and the Müller-Lyer illusion: amplitude or endpoint bias?, Exp. Brain Res. 160 (2005) 71–78. demonstrated that perceptual biases associated with the Müller-Lyer illusion resulted from a misperception of figure extent, while manual aiming biases resulted from a misperception of vertex position. In this study, we examined the degree to which prior knowledge of task requirements influenced how participants coded visual–spatial information associated with Müller-Lyer configurations. Specifically, we investigated how illusory biases are affected when uncertainty exists as to whether participants will be required to make a perceptual-cognitive decision about the length of a figure or complete a rapid aiming movement to a figure vertex. Although aiming movements were completed in a similar manner regardless of the prior knowledge condition, perceptual biases were associated with a misperception of extent when the task was known and a misperception of both extent and position when the task was unknown. These findings indicate that people are flexible in the manner in which they code visual–spatial information.
%0 Journal Article
%1 citeulike:7630735
%A Keetch, Katherine M.
%A Glazebrook, Cheryl M.
%A Lyons, James
%A Lam, Melanie Y.
%A Weeks, Daniel J.
%A Elliott, Digby
%D 2006
%J Neuroscience Letters
%K illusory_bias uncertainty
%N 1-2
%P 117--121
%R 10.1016/j.neulet.2006.07.025
%T The effect of response uncertainty on illusory biases of perception and action
%U http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2006.07.025
%V 406
%X When task requirements were known in advance, Glazebrook et al. C.M. Glazebrook, V.P. Dhillon, K.M. Keetch, J. Lyons, E. Amazeen, D.J. Weeks, D. Elliott, Perception–action and the Müller-Lyer illusion: amplitude or endpoint bias?, Exp. Brain Res. 160 (2005) 71–78. demonstrated that perceptual biases associated with the Müller-Lyer illusion resulted from a misperception of figure extent, while manual aiming biases resulted from a misperception of vertex position. In this study, we examined the degree to which prior knowledge of task requirements influenced how participants coded visual–spatial information associated with Müller-Lyer configurations. Specifically, we investigated how illusory biases are affected when uncertainty exists as to whether participants will be required to make a perceptual-cognitive decision about the length of a figure or complete a rapid aiming movement to a figure vertex. Although aiming movements were completed in a similar manner regardless of the prior knowledge condition, perceptual biases were associated with a misperception of extent when the task was known and a misperception of both extent and position when the task was unknown. These findings indicate that people are flexible in the manner in which they code visual–spatial information.
@article{citeulike:7630735,
abstract = {{When task requirements were known in advance, Glazebrook et al. [C.M. Glazebrook, V.P. Dhillon, K.M. Keetch, J. Lyons, E. Amazeen, D.J. Weeks, D. Elliott, Perception–action and the M\"{u}ller-Lyer illusion: amplitude or endpoint bias?, Exp. Brain Res. 160 (2005) 71–78.] demonstrated that perceptual biases associated with the M\"{u}ller-Lyer illusion resulted from a misperception of figure extent, while manual aiming biases resulted from a misperception of vertex position. In this study, we examined the degree to which prior knowledge of task requirements influenced how participants coded visual–spatial information associated with M\"{u}ller-Lyer configurations. Specifically, we investigated how illusory biases are affected when uncertainty exists as to whether participants will be required to make a perceptual-cognitive decision about the length of a figure or complete a rapid aiming movement to a figure vertex. Although aiming movements were completed in a similar manner regardless of the prior knowledge condition, perceptual biases were associated with a misperception of extent when the task was known and a misperception of both extent and position when the task was unknown. These findings indicate that people are flexible in the manner in which they code visual–spatial information.}},
added-at = {2010-11-30T22:39:03.000+0100},
author = {Keetch, Katherine M. and Glazebrook, Cheryl M. and Lyons, James and Lam, Melanie Y. and Weeks, Daniel J. and Elliott, Digby},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/246fb1ea0e7bdca9fc6df4ca72361b47b/smatthiesen},
citeulike-article-id = {7630735},
citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2006.07.025},
citeulike-linkout-1 = {http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0304394006007142},
day = 02,
doi = {10.1016/j.neulet.2006.07.025},
interhash = {0af23e4ef177d4770b56ad1de430f46a},
intrahash = {46fb1ea0e7bdca9fc6df4ca72361b47b},
issn = {03043940},
journal = {Neuroscience Letters},
keywords = {illusory_bias uncertainty},
month = {October},
number = {1-2},
pages = {117--121},
posted-at = {2010-08-13 10:25:02},
priority = {2},
timestamp = {2010-12-02T11:04:11.000+0100},
title = {{The effect of response uncertainty on illusory biases of perception and action}},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2006.07.025},
volume = 406,
year = 2006
}