↓ Skip to main content

The Two-Wrongs model explains perception-action dissociations for illusions driven by distortions of the egocentric reference frame

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
2 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Two-Wrongs model explains perception-action dissociations for illusions driven by distortions of the egocentric reference frame
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00140
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul Dassonville, Scott A. Reed

Abstract

Several studies have demonstrated a dissociation of the effects of illusion on perception and action, with perception generally reported to be susceptible to illusions, while actions are seemingly immune. These findings have been interpreted to support Milner and Goodale's Two Visual Systems model, which proposes the existence of separate visual processing streams for perception and action. However, an alternative interpretation suggests that this type of behavioral dissociation will occur for any illusion that is caused by a distortion of the observer's egocentric reference frame, without requiring the existence of separate perception and action systems that are differently affected by the illusion. In this scenario, movements aimed at illusory targets will be accurate if they are guided within the same distorted reference frame used for target encoding, since the error of motor guidance will cancel with the error of encoding (hence, for actions, two wrongs do make a right). We further test this Two-Wrongs model by examining two illusions for which the hypothesis makes very different predictions: the rod-and-frame illusion (which affects perception but not actions) and the simultaneous-tilt illusion (which affects perception and actions equally). We demonstrate that the rod-and-frame illusion is caused by a distortion of the observer's egocentric reference frame suitable for the cancellation of errors predicted by the Two-Wrongs model. In contrast, the simultaneous-tilt illusion is caused by local interactions between stimulus elements within an undistorted reference frame, precluding the cancellation of errors associated with the Two-Wrongs model such that the illusion is reflected in both perception and actions. These results provide evidence for a class of illusions that lead to dissociations of perception and action through distortions of the observer's spatial reference frame, rather than through the actions of functionally separate visual processing streams.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Romania 1 2%
Unknown 39 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 29%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Other 2 5%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 46%
Neuroscience 8 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 6 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 May 2015.
All research outputs
#637,119
of 22,793,427 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#299
of 7,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,483
of 285,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#14
of 182 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,793,427 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,145 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 285,999 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 182 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.