September 2011
Volume 11, Issue 11
Free
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2011
Decisions at a glance: The relative cost of multiple possible actions is represented in conscious perception of spatial layout
Author Affiliations
  • Jonathan Zadra
    Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, USA
  • David Rosenbaum
    Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, USA
  • Thomas Banton
    Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, USA
  • Elyssa Twedt
    Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, USA
  • E. Blair Gross
    Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, USA
  • Dennis Proffitt
    Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, USA
Journal of Vision September 2011, Vol.11, 942. doi:10.1167/11.11.942
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Jonathan Zadra, David Rosenbaum, Thomas Banton, Elyssa Twedt, E. Blair Gross, Dennis Proffitt; Decisions at a glance: The relative cost of multiple possible actions is represented in conscious perception of spatial layout. Journal of Vision 2011;11(11):942. doi: 10.1167/11.11.942.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Prior to performing a physical action in the environment, decisions must be made to select one from multiple potential actions and then from multiple ways of performing it. One of the chief factors involved in such decisions is the effort required to perform the action. Noting that effort can be difficult to measure, Rosenbaum, Brach, and Semenov (2010) implemented a two-alternative forced choice action procedure that required participants to choose between a short or long reach across a table to pick up a bucket, with the constraint that the choice would also determine how far they had to carry the bucket. Participants' action choices demonstrated a consistent trade-off between the costs of walking and reaching, indicating that the effort involved in individual components of an action sequence play a combined, predictable role in the choice of how to act. In the current study, we replicated their design with several additions. Of primary interest, participants' perception of one potential carrying distance was assessed on each trial prior to performing the actions. When the distance being estimated was one that they believed to require less combined reaching/walking effort (as indicated by the fact that they would later choose to carry the bucket over that distance instead of the alternative choice), the distance was perceived as shorter, and conversely when the distance being estimated was the one they believed to require more combined effort (i.e. they would later choose to carry the bucket over the alternate distance), the distance being estimated appeared farther. Thus, perception of a single component in an action sequence (distance to be walked) was influenced by a second component as well: the effort required to reach. In this respect, it may be that changes to conscious perception of spatial layout serve in part to guide complex action choices.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×