ABSTRACT
The theory of direct perception suggests that observers can accurately judge the mass of a box picked up by a lifter shown in a point-light display. However, accurate perceptual performance may be limited to specific circumstances. The purpose of the present study was to systematically examine the factors that determine perception of mass, including display type, lifting speed, response type, and lifter's strength. In contrast to previous research, a wider range of viewing manipulations of point-light display conditions was investigated. In Experiment 1, we first created a circumstance where observers could accurately judge lifts of five box masses performed by a lifter of average strength. In Experiments 2-5, we manipulated the spatial and temporal aspects of the lift, the judgement type, and lifter's strength, respectively. Results showed that mass judgement gets worse whenever the context deviates from ideal conditions, such as when only the lifted object was shown, when video play speed was changed, or when lifters of different strength performed the same task. In conclusion, observers' perception of kinetic properties is compromised whenever viewing conditions are not ideal.
Subject(s)
Motion Perception/physiology , Visual Perception/physiology , Weight Perception/physiology , Adolescent , Analysis of Variance , Attention/physiology , Biomechanical Phenomena , Female , Humans , Judgment/physiology , Lifting , Male , Photic Stimulation/methods , Psychophysics , Reaction Time/physiology , Space Perception/physiology , Weight-Bearing , Young AdultABSTRACT
The preparation and on-line control of short, rapid sequential aiming responses were studied in 3 experiments. Participants (N = 12 in Experiments 1 and 2, and 20 in Experiment 3) produced 3-segment responses (a) within self-initiation, simple reaction time (RT), and choice RT paradigms (Experiment 1); (b) without visual feedback under self-initiation conditions (Experiment 2); and (c) with and without visual feedback under simple RT conditions (Experiment 3). In all conditions in which participants initiated movement in response to an external imperative signal, the 2nd response segment was performed consistently slower than preceding and succeeding response segments. That pattern of segmental movement times was found whether or not visual feedback was available but was not evident when participants self-initiated their responses with or without visual feedback. The findings rule out the possibility that subjects' use of visual feedback is responsible for the slowing of the 2nd response segment under RT conditions and suggest that the programming of rapid sequential aiming responses can be distributed in pre- and postinitiation intervals.
