Near-hand effects are robust: Three OSF pre-registered replications of visual biases in perihand space

Lateral peri-hand bias affects the horizontal but not the vertical distribution of attention

It has been demonstrated that humans exhibit an attention bias towards the lower visual field (e.g., faster target detection for targets appearing below eye level). This bias has been interpreted as reflecting the visual motor demand in near space below eye level. In this study, we examined whether this spatial bias could be affected by participants' hand position at the time of testing. Specifically, if the hand position is held at eye level at the time of target detection, whether the bias toward the lower visual field would be reduced if the bias is directly related to the motor demand at the time of testing. Using a modified spatial cueing paradigm, in Experiment 1, we found a downward bias in reaction time measures and cueing effects in a target detection task. In Experiment 2, using the same stimulus used in Experiment 1, we compared attention performance when participants' dominant (right) hand was positioned close to the right side of the visual display with the conditions where their hand was in their laps. We revealed that despite an influence on the horizontal distribution of attention (lateral peri-hand effect), the downward bias in attention remained regardless of the hand position. This revealed that lateral peri-hand manipulation is insufficient to override the attention advantage for stimuli appearing in the lower visual field.

Action does not drive visual biases in peri-tool space

Observers experience visual biases in the area around handheld tools. These biases may occur when active use leads an observer to incorporate a tool into the body schema. However, the visual salience of a handheld tool may instead create an attentional prioritization that is not reliant on body-based representations. We investigated these competing explanations of near-tool visual biases in two experiments during which participants performed a target detection task. Targets could appear near or far from a tool positioned next to a display. In Experiment 1, participants showed facilitation in detecting targets that appeared near a simple handheld rake tool regardless of whether they first used the rake to retrieve objects, but participants who only viewed the tool without holding it were no faster to detect targets appearing near the rake than targets that appeared on the opposite side of the display. In a second experiment, participants who held a novel magnetic tool again showed a near-tool bias even when they refrained from using the tool. Taken together, these results suggest active use is unnecessary, but visual salience is not sufficient, to introduce visual biases in peri-tool space.

Opposing influences of global and local stimulus-hand proximity on crosstalk interference in dual tasks

In contrast to traditional dualistic views of cognition, visual stimulus processing appears not independent of bodily factors such as hand positioning. For example, reduced crosstalk between two temporally overlapping tasks has been observed when the hands are moved into the attentional window alongside their respective stimuli (i.e., establishing global stimulus-hand proximity). This result indicates that hand-specific attentional processing enhancements support a more serial rather than parallel processing of the two tasks. To further elucidate the nature of these processing modulations and their effect on multitasking performance, the present study consisted of three interrelated crosstalk experiments. Experiment 1 manipulated global stimulus-hand proximity and stimulus-effect proximity orthogonally, with results demonstrating that hand proximity rather than effect proximity drives the crosstalk reduction. Experiment 2 manipulated the physical distance between both hands (i.e., varying local stimulus-hand proximity), with results showing weak evidence of increased crosstalk when both hands are close to each other. Experiment 3 tested opposing influences of global and local stimulus-hand proximity as observed in Experiment 1 and 2 rigorously within one experiment, by employing an orthogonal manipulation of these two proximity measures. Again, we observed slightly increased crosstalk for hands close to each other (replicating Experiment 2); however, in contrast to Experiment 1, the effect of global stimulus-hand proximity on the observed crosstalk was not significant this time. Taken together, the experiments support the notion of hand-specific modulations of perception-action coupling, which can either lead to more or less interference in multitasking, depending on the exact arrangement of hands and stimuli.

Effects of finger and mouse pointing on learning from online split-attention examples

BACKGROUND

Self-management of cognitive load is a recent development in cognitive load theory. Finger pointing has been shown to be a potential self-management strategy to support learning from spatially separated, but mutually referring text and pictures (i.e., split-attention examples).

AIMS

The present study aimed to extend the prior research on the pointing strategy and investigated the effects of finger pointing on learning from online split-attention examples. Moreover, we examined an alternative pointing strategy using the computer mouse, and a combination of finger pointing and computer-mouse pointing.

SAMPLE

One-hundred and forty-five university students participated in the present study.

METHOD

All participants studied an online split-attention example about the human nervous system and were randomly allocated to one of four conditions: (1) pointing with the index finger, (2) pointing with the computer mouse, (3) pointing with the index finger and the computer mouse and (4) no pointing.

RESULTS

Results confirmed our main hypothesis, indicating that finger pointing led to higher retention performance than no pointing. However, the mouse pointing strategy and the combined finger and mouse pointing strategy did not show supportive effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Finger pointing can be used as a simple and convenient self-management strategy in online learning environments. Mouse pointing may not be as effective as finger pointing.

Perspective Taking and Avatar-Self Merging

Today, avatars often represent users in digital worlds such as in video games or workplace applications. Avatars embody the user and perform their actions in these artificial environments. As a result, users sometimes develop the feeling that their self merges with their avatar. The user realizes that they are the avatar, but the avatar is also the user-meaning that avatar's appearance, character, and actions also affect their self. In the present paper, we first introduce the event-coding approach of the self and then argue based on the reviewed literature on human-avatar interaction that a self-controlled avatar can lead to avatar-self merging: the user sets their own goals in the virtual environment, plans and executes the avatar's actions, and compares the predicted with the actual motion outcomes of the avatar. This makes the user feel body ownership and agency over the avatar's action. Following the event-coding account, avatar-self merging should not be seen as an all-or-nothing process, but rather as a continuous process to which various factors contribute, including successfully taking the perspective of the avatar. Against this background, we discuss affective, cognitive, and visuo-spatial perspective taking of the avatar. As evidence for avatar-self merging, we present findings showing that when users take the avatar's perspective, they can show spontaneous behavioral tendencies that run counter to their own.

Vision is biased near handheld, but not remotely operated, tools

Previous studies have shown that after actively using a handheld tool for a period of time, participants show visual biases toward stimuli presented near the end of the tool. Research suggests this is driven by an incorporation of the tool into the observer's body schema, extending peripersonal space to surround the tool. This study aims to investigate whether the same visual biases might be seen near remotely operated tools. Participants used tools-a handheld rake (Experiment 1), a remote-controlled drone (Experiment 2), a remote-controlled excavator (Experiment 3), or a handheld excavator (Experiment 4)-to rake sand for several minutes, then performed a target-detection task in which they made speeded responses to targets appearing near and far from the tool. In Experiment 1, participants detected targets appearing near the rake significantly faster than targets appearing far from the rake, replicating previous findings. We failed to find strong evidence of improved target detection near remotely operated tools in Experiments 2 and 3, but found clear evidence of near-tool facilitation in Experiment 4 when participants physically picked up the excavator and used it as a handheld tool. These results suggest that observers may not incorporate remotely operated tools into the body schema in the same manner as handheld tools. We discuss potential mechanisms that may drive these differences in embodiment between handheld and remote-controlled tools.