Limits...
Unconscious effects of action on perception.

Halász V, Cunnington R - Brain Sci (2012)

Bottom Line: This involves developing theories and making predictions about others' intentions, goals and about the consequences of the actions we are observing.However, recent theories suggest that the link between motor and perceptual areas is bidirectional, and that predictions based on planned or intended actions can unconsciously influence and modify our perception.In the following review we describe current theories on the link between action and perception, and examine the ways in which the motor system can unconsciously alter our perception.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Queensland Brain Institute, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia. v.halasz@uq.edu.au.

ABSTRACT
We spend much of our life predicting the future. This involves developing theories and making predictions about others' intentions, goals and about the consequences of the actions we are observing. Adapting our actions and behaviours to the environment is required for achieving our goals, and to do this the motor system relies on input from sensory modalities. However, recent theories suggest that the link between motor and perceptual areas is bidirectional, and that predictions based on planned or intended actions can unconsciously influence and modify our perception. In the following review we describe current theories on the link between action and perception, and examine the ways in which the motor system can unconsciously alter our perception.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Example of the common coding theory. Thinking about “drinking coffee” activates associated codes, which frequently occur together, such as objects (e.g., coffee cup, coffee beans), motor plans (e.g., the way we like to hold our cup), and sensory states (e.g., the colour, smell, taste of coffee), biasing subsequent processing of any of these associated states.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4061788&req=5

brainsci-02-00130-f001: Example of the common coding theory. Thinking about “drinking coffee” activates associated codes, which frequently occur together, such as objects (e.g., coffee cup, coffee beans), motor plans (e.g., the way we like to hold our cup), and sensory states (e.g., the colour, smell, taste of coffee), biasing subsequent processing of any of these associated states.

Mentions: The earliest theoretical framework on the connection between perception and action is the ideomotor theory [6]. It suggests that actions and internal images of actions are closely linked, and that actions are represented by their sensory consequences [7]. Building upon these basic ideas two widely cited theories have been proposed, first the common coding theory [8] and later the theory of event coding [9]. According to these theories, fundamentally the same areas of the brain are involved in perceiving and planning an event. For example, if we are about to have a cup of coffee, or maybe just smelling the coffee, the same areas of the brain become commonly active, as the motor acts and their associated sensory states are commonly coded in the brain (Figure 1). The common coding theory does not strictly define how information flows within this network. It is neither predictive nor postdictive for the same reason: while one thinking about “coffee” neural activity of past memories related to coffee drinking or future imagined events are equally likely to be activated. This indistinct nature makes the common coding theory flexible enough to explain several phenomena related to perception-action and action-perception connections. However, it is not exactly clear on how and why different codes become active or “remain silent” in any given situation; therefore it is hard to assess the validity of this theory scientifically.


Unconscious effects of action on perception.

Halász V, Cunnington R - Brain Sci (2012)

Example of the common coding theory. Thinking about “drinking coffee” activates associated codes, which frequently occur together, such as objects (e.g., coffee cup, coffee beans), motor plans (e.g., the way we like to hold our cup), and sensory states (e.g., the colour, smell, taste of coffee), biasing subsequent processing of any of these associated states.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4061788&req=5

brainsci-02-00130-f001: Example of the common coding theory. Thinking about “drinking coffee” activates associated codes, which frequently occur together, such as objects (e.g., coffee cup, coffee beans), motor plans (e.g., the way we like to hold our cup), and sensory states (e.g., the colour, smell, taste of coffee), biasing subsequent processing of any of these associated states.
Mentions: The earliest theoretical framework on the connection between perception and action is the ideomotor theory [6]. It suggests that actions and internal images of actions are closely linked, and that actions are represented by their sensory consequences [7]. Building upon these basic ideas two widely cited theories have been proposed, first the common coding theory [8] and later the theory of event coding [9]. According to these theories, fundamentally the same areas of the brain are involved in perceiving and planning an event. For example, if we are about to have a cup of coffee, or maybe just smelling the coffee, the same areas of the brain become commonly active, as the motor acts and their associated sensory states are commonly coded in the brain (Figure 1). The common coding theory does not strictly define how information flows within this network. It is neither predictive nor postdictive for the same reason: while one thinking about “coffee” neural activity of past memories related to coffee drinking or future imagined events are equally likely to be activated. This indistinct nature makes the common coding theory flexible enough to explain several phenomena related to perception-action and action-perception connections. However, it is not exactly clear on how and why different codes become active or “remain silent” in any given situation; therefore it is hard to assess the validity of this theory scientifically.

Bottom Line: This involves developing theories and making predictions about others' intentions, goals and about the consequences of the actions we are observing.However, recent theories suggest that the link between motor and perceptual areas is bidirectional, and that predictions based on planned or intended actions can unconsciously influence and modify our perception.In the following review we describe current theories on the link between action and perception, and examine the ways in which the motor system can unconsciously alter our perception.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Queensland Brain Institute, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia. v.halasz@uq.edu.au.

ABSTRACT
We spend much of our life predicting the future. This involves developing theories and making predictions about others' intentions, goals and about the consequences of the actions we are observing. Adapting our actions and behaviours to the environment is required for achieving our goals, and to do this the motor system relies on input from sensory modalities. However, recent theories suggest that the link between motor and perceptual areas is bidirectional, and that predictions based on planned or intended actions can unconsciously influence and modify our perception. In the following review we describe current theories on the link between action and perception, and examine the ways in which the motor system can unconsciously alter our perception.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus