The unimanual handle-to-hand correspondence effect: evidence for a location coding account

Compatibility effects with destination and origin of motion

Previous studies highlighted spatial compatibility effects other than those strictly arising from stimulus-response locations. In particular, the so-called Destination Compatibility (DC) effect refers to faster responses for dynamic (i.e., moving) stimuli the end point of which is spatially compatible with the response key. Four experiments examined whether the DC effect also occurs with static visual stimuli symbolically representing either motion destination alone (Experiment 1a), or both motion origin and destination (Experiments 1b, 2a, and 2b). Overall, our results are consistent in showing a DC effect; most importantly, the present findings reveal a predominance of the effect of destination of motion over that of origin, even when both the starting and ending positions of the stimulus are symbolically represented and participants are instructed to respond according to motion origin. This finding suggests that the DC effect is independent from other stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effects.

Kinematic Studies of the Go/No-Go Task as a Dynamic Sensorimotor Inhibition Task for Assessment of Motor and Executive Function in Stroke Patients: An Exploratory Study in a Neurotypical Sample

Inhibition of reaching and grasping actions as an element of cognitive control and executive function is a vital component of sensorimotor behaviour that is often impaired in patients who have lost sensorimotor function following a stroke. To date, there are few kinematic studies detailing the fine spatial and temporal upper limb movements associated with the millisecond temporal trajectory of correct and incorrect responses to visually driven Go/No-Go reaching and grasping tasks. Therefore, we aimed to refine the behavioural measurement of correct and incorrect inhibitory motor responses in a Go/No-Go task for future quantification and personalized rehabilitation in older populations and those with acquired motor disorders, such as stroke. An exploratory study mapping the kinematic profiles of hand movements in neurotypical participants utilizing such a task was conducted using high-speed biological motion capture cameras, revealing both within and between subject differences in a sample of healthy participants. These kinematic profiles and differences are discussed in the context of better assessment of sensorimotor function impairment in stroke survivors.

Wearing the face mask affects our social attention over space

Recent studies suggest that covering the face inhibits the recognition of identity and emotional expressions. However, it might also make the eyes more salient, since they are a reliable index to orient our social and spatial attention. This study investigates (1) whether the pervasive interaction with people with face masks fostered by the COVID-19 pandemic modulates the processing of spatial information essential to shift attention according to other’s eye-gaze direction (i.e., gaze-cueing effect: GCE), and (2) whether this potential modulation interacts with motor responses (i.e., Simon effect). Participants were presented with face cues orienting their gaze to a congruent or incongruent target letter location (gaze-cueing paradigm) while wearing a surgical mask (Mask), a patch (Control), or nothing (No-Mask). The task required to discriminate the identity of the lateralized target letters by pressing one of two lateralized response keys, in a corresponding or a non-corresponding position with respect to the target. Results showed that GCE was not modulated by the presence of the Mask, but it occurred in the No-Mask condition, confirming previous studies. Crucially, the GCE interacted with Simon effect in the Mask and Control conditions, though in different ways. While in the Mask condition the GCE emerged only when target and response positions corresponded (i.e., Simon-corresponding trials), in the Control condition it emerged only when they did not correspond (i.e., Simon-non-corresponding trials). These results indicate that people with face masks induce us to jointly orient our visual attention in the direction of the seen gaze (GCE) in those conditions resembling (or associated with) a general approaching behavior (Simon-corresponding trials). This is likely promoted by the fact that we tend to perceive wearing the mask as a personal safety measure and, thus, someone wearing the face mask is perceived as a trustworthy person. In contrast, people with a patch on their face can be perceived as more threatening, therefore inducing a GCE in those conditions associated with a general avoidance behavior (Simon-non-corresponding trials).

The visual size of graspable objects is needed to induce the potentiation of grasping behaviors even with verbal stimuli

Merely perceiving objects usually grasped with a power or a precision grip (e.g., an apple vs. a cherry) potentiate power-grip and precision-grip responses, respectively. According to the size-coding account, this potentiation effect is due to the compatibility between size codes associated with both stimuli and responses, rather than to the simulation of motor information stored at a conceptual level (i.e., the embodied account). At the stimulus level, size-coding would occur, because objects associated with a power grip are usually presented in a larger visual size than objects associated with a precision grip. However, this explanation is challenged by results, showing that reading nouns of objects associated with power or precision grip also leads to potentiation effects, even though the visual size of the displayed object is no longer perceived. Therefore, we designed three experiments to better understand this word-based potentiation effect and to investigate whether it relies on size codes. Our results showed a word-based potentiation effect only when the object nouns were interleaved with pictures depicting the objects in their typical visual size. We discuss the contributions of these results for both the size-coding account and the embodied account of the potentiation effect of grasping behaviors.

Tool heads prime saccades

Tools are wielded by their handles, but a lot of information about their function comes from their heads (the action-ends). Here we investigated whether eye saccadic movements are primed by tool handles, or whether they are primed by tool heads. We measured human saccadic reaction times while subjects were performing an attentional task. We found that saccades were executed quicker when performed to the side congruent with the tool head, even though "toolness" was irrelevant for the task. Our results show that heads are automatically processed by the visual system to orient eye movements, indicating that eyes are attracted by functional parts of manipulable objects and by the characteristic information these parts convey.

Size coding of alternative responses is sufficient to induce a potentiation effect with manipulable objects

The mere perception of manipulable objects usually grasped with a power-grip (e.g., an apple) or a precision-grip (e.g., a cherry) potentiate power-grip- and precision-grip-responses, respectively. This effect is seen as to be driven by automatic access of the representation of manipulable objects that includes a motor representation of usually performed grasping behaviors (i.e., the embodied view). Nevertheless, a competing account argues that this effect could be due to an overlapping of size codes used to represent both manipulable objects and response options. Indeed, objects usually grasped with a power- and a precision-grip (e.g., an apple vs. a cherry) could be coded as large- and small-objects, respectively; and power- and precision-grip responses as large- and small-responses, respectively. We conducted 4 experiments to test this hypothesis. In Experiment 1, the response device usually used in studies reporting a potentiation effect is fixed horizontally (the grasping component of responses was removed). We instructed participants to press the small-switch with their index-digit and the large-switch with their palm-hand. In line with the size-coding-hypothesis, responses on the small-switch performed with the index-digit led to shorter RTs when objects usually associated with a precision-grip (e.g., a cherry) were presented compared to objects usually associated with a power-grip (e.g., an apple). A reverse pattern was obtained for responses on the large-switch performed with the palm-hand. In Experiments 2, 3 and 4, we went further by investigating which factors of Experiment 1 allow the size coding of responses: the size of switch and/or the size of the effector part used. Data confirmed the critical involvement of the size of switches and the possible involvement of the size of the effector part used. Thus, data support the possibility that the potentiation of grasping is due to a compatibility/incompatibility between size codes rather than involving motor representations of usually performed grasping behaviors as advocated in several embodied views. Moreover, data support the possibility that responses are coded thanks to a size code that extends the Theory of Event Coding.

Technition: When Tools Come Out of the Closet

People are ambivalently enthusiastic and anxious about how far technology can go. Therefore, understanding the neurocognitive bases of the human technical mind should be a major topic of the cognitive sciences. Surprisingly, however, scientists are not interested in this topic or address it only marginally in other mainstream domains (e.g., motor control, action observation, social cognition). In fact, this lack of interest may hinder our understanding of the necessary neurocognitive skills underlying our appetence for transforming our physical environment. Here, we develop the thesis that our technical mind originates in perhaps uniquely human neurocognitive skills, namely, technical-reasoning skills involving the area PF within the left inferior parietal lobe. This thesis creates an epistemological rupture with the state of the art that justifies the emergence of a new field in the cognitive sciences (i.e., technition) dedicated to the intelligence hidden behind tools and other forms of technologies, including constructions.

Critical bottom-up attentional factors in the handle orientation effect: asymmetric luminance transients and object-center eccentricity relative to fixation

In 1998, Tucker and Ellis found that keypress responses are faster when the task-irrelevant orientation of a graspable object's handle corresponds to response hand location. Over the past 20 years, researchers have disagreed over the extent to which grasping affordance or spatial compatibility contributes to the effect. One of the causes behind the conflicting findings and interpretations may be that studies advocating the grasping affordance view have tended to overlook the contributions of low-level perceptual characteristics to the observed correspondence effects. The present study evaluated the role of visual salience and bottom-up attention in the occurrence of the effect. Experiment 1 involved a vertical orientation task (bimanual keypresses) using photographs of graspable objects, centered based on object width or pixel area. The same procedure was performed using a color discrimination task on solid-colored silhouettes, large (Experiment 2) and small-sized (Experiment 3), as well as silhouette outlines (Experiment 4). Similar result patterns across Experiments 1-3 were observed and discussed in the context of diverging findings in Experiment 4, prompting us to introduce the notion of asymmetry-based Simon effects, whereby location is coded at stimulus onset on the basis of asymmetric changes in luminance between both hemifields, coupled with object-center eccentricity relative to fixation. These low-level factors were critical in modulating the temporal dynamics, as well as the direction of compatibility effects (toward handles or bodies), irrespective of grasping affordance, task, object identity, or stimulus size. The present findings provide further evidence that the Tucker and Ellis paradigm for studying variable affordances is extremely vulnerable to location-coding, which may arise on the basis of exogenous deployments of attention. This problem is only exacerbated in a large portion of the relevant literature, whereby visually complex stimuli are primarily discussed in terms of their graspable nature and relation to task, rather than their low-level, attention-capturing features.

The prominent role of perceptual salience in object discrimination: overt discrimination of graspable side does not activate grasping affordances

Responses to object stimuli are often faster when jutting handles are aligned with responding hands, than when they are not: handle-to-hand correspondence effects. According to a location coding account, locations of visually salient jutting parts determine the spatial coding of objects. This asymmetry then facilitates same-sided responses compared to responses on the opposite side. Alternatively, this effect has been attributed to grasping actions of the left or the right hand afforded by the handle orientation and independent of its salience (affordance activation account). Our experiments were designed to disentangle the effects of pure salience from those of affordance activations. We selected pictures of tools with one salient and non-graspable side, and one graspable and non-salient side (non-jutting handle). Two experiments were run. Each experiment had two groups of participants: one group discriminated the location of the salient side of the object stimuli; the other group discriminated the location of the graspable side of them. In Experiment 1, responses were left and right button presses; in Experiment 2, they were left and right button presses plus reach-and-grasp actions. When visual salience was removed from graspable sides, no correspondence effect was observed between their orientation and the responding hands in both the experiments. Conversely, when salience depended on non-graspable portions, a correspondence effect was produced between their orientation and the responding hand. Overt attention to graspable sides did not potentiate any grasping affordance even when participants executed grasping responses in addition to button presses. Results support the location coding account: performance was influenced by the spatial coding of visually salient properties of objects.

Handle-Hand Compatibility Effects for the Right and Left Hand Using Reach-to-Touch Movements

In stimulus-response compatibility tasks, performance is better when the handle of an object is oriented on the same side of the response than when the handle is oriented on the opposite side. Two major alternative accounts, the motor affordance and spatial accounts, have been proposed to explain this handle-hand compatibility effect. In two experiments, we tested between these two accounts by administering a go/no-go task to right-handed participants. Handled objects presented on a touchscreen were used as stimuli. Half of the participants had to reach-to-touch the stimuli by using their dominant hand, the other half by using their nondominant hand. Liftoff times (LTs), movement times (MTs) and spatial coordinates of the movement endpoints were recorded. Results from the LTs and MTs analyses showed no evidence of handle-hand compatibility effects. In contrast, the analyses of the spatial coordinates revealed that participants' touches were shifted more laterally towards the handle when the handles were oriented on the same side of the responding hand (Experiments 1 and 2). Furthermore, the right-hand touches landed higher (towards the handle) than the left-hand touches, especially when the vertical object dimension was particularly salient (Experiment 1). Overall, these results are in line with the activation of hand motor programs to reach and grasp the object as predicted by the motor account, at least for the right/dominant hand.

Do my hands prime your hands? The hand-to-response correspondence effect

Previous research has shown an effect of handle-response correspondence on key-press responses when participants judged the upright or inverted orientation of photographed one-handled graspable objects. In three experiments, we explored whether this effect still holds for symmetric graspable objects that are usually grasped by two hands (i.e. two-handled objects; e.g. shears). In Experiments 1 and 2, participants were required to perform a between-hand response in order to categorize cooking or amusement objects appearing as grasped from either an allocentric (Experiment 1) or an egocentric perspective (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, they were required to perform a within-hand response to categorize the same stimuli appearing as grasped from an egocentric perspective. Across all three experiments, results showed that categorization was more difficult when the objects were displayed as grasped on the opposite side than the response rather than on the same side. We discuss the implications of these results for theories of action potentiation and spatial coding and suggest that different mechanisms may be recruited depending on the required action (i.e. response mode).

A meta-analysis of the object-based compatibility effect

The object-based compatibility effect (CE) describes, in the context of two-choice keypress tasks, the facilitation of response times (RTs) by the correspondence between participants' response hand and the task-irrelevant orientation of a viewed object's handle. Object-based CEs are often attributed to affordance perception. Although the object-based CE paradigm is the major RT task used to study affordances, failures to replicate the effect have raised questions about its robustness. Moreover, it remains unclear whether the object-based CE is indeed indicative of affordances, or whether it is merely an example of spatial CEs brought about by the object's protruding handle. We present a meta-analysis of object-based CEs to (1) obtain a point estimate of the overall effect and (2) test for moderation consistent with either affordance or spatial compatibility accounts. From 88 independent effects (computed on 2359 participants), we estimated a small but significant compatibility effect (ES = 0.106, z = 5.44, p < .001 95% CI:[0.068, 0.145]), although evidence of publication bias suggests that the true effect is smaller in magnitude. Further, we found significant heterogeneity in effect sizes, indicating between-study variation beyond sampling variability. Moderator analyses indicated that CEs were larger when (1) task-relevant decisions were not about the function of objects, (2) when stimuli were silhouettes as opposed to photographs, and (3) when objects were centered on-screen according to their base or pixel distribution. Response mode (within vs between-hand) did not moderate CEs, nor did the critical interaction between stimulus type (photograph vs silhouette/illustration) and response mode. In all, results are mostly consistent with a spatial compatibility account of object-based CEs. Finally, analyses revealed moderation by trial and task structure, providing implications for study design.

Correspondence effect driven by salient visual asymmetries in integral object stimuli

The handle-to-hand correspondence effect consists of faster and more accurate responses when the responding hand is aligned with the handle side of an object tool, compared to when they lay on opposite sides. This effect has been attributed to the activation of affordances. Recent studies, however, claimed that it may depend on the spatial coding of the object on the basis of its visual asymmetry (location-coding account). Affordances are namely direct and meaningful relations between recognized objects and the observers' action system. Therefore, any manipulation that disrupts the body structure of object tools could potentially affect their identification and prevent the activation of affordances. The present study investigated the nature of the handle-to-hand correspondence effects by manipulating structural asymmetry and visual salience of object tools, while preserving their integrity that is, leaving unaltered the original possibilities to activate grasping affordances. Three experiments were run. Results were consistent with the location-coding account and claim for accurate control of visual asymmetries in object stimuli during investigation of affordance effects.