↓ Skip to main content

Dissociating between object affordances and spatial compatibility effects using early response components

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Dissociating between object affordances and spatial compatibility effects using early response components
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00591
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meytal Wilf, Nicholas P. Holmes, Isabella Schwartz, Tamar R. Makin

Abstract

objects may be perceived not only in terms of visual features, but also in terms of possibilities for action. Previous studies showed that when a centrally located object has a salient graspable feature (e.g., a handle), it facilitates motor responses corresponding with the feature's position. However, such so-called affordance effects have been criticized as resulting from spatial compatibility effects, due to the visual asymmetry created by the graspable feature, irrespective of any affordances. In order to dissociate between affordance and spatial compatibility effects, we asked participants to perform a simple reaction-time task to typically graspable and non-graspable objects with similar visual features (e.g., lollipop and stop sign). Responses were measured using either electromyography (EMG) on proximal arm muscles during reaching-like movements, or with finger key-presses. In both EMG and button press measurements, participants responded faster when the object was either presented in the same location as the responding hand, or was affordable, resulting in significant and independent spatial compatibility and affordance effects, but no interaction. Furthermore, while the spatial compatibility effect was present from the earliest stages of movement preparation and throughout the different stages of movement execution, the affordance effect was restricted to the early stages of movement execution. Finally, we tested a small group of unilateral arm amputees using EMG, and found residual spatial compatibility but no affordance, suggesting that spatial compatibility effects do not necessarily rely on individuals' available affordances. Our results show dissociation between affordance and spatial compatibility effects, and suggest that rather than evoking the specific motor action most suitable for interaction with the viewed object, graspable objects prompt the motor system in a general, body-part independent fashion.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Russia 1 1%
China 1 1%
Unknown 67 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 20%
Researcher 13 19%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 9 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 35 50%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Engineering 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 10 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 02 April 2021.
All research outputs
#16,409,687
of 24,943,708 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#17,708
of 33,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,495
of 292,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#649
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,943,708 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 292,957 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.