Sensorimotor chauvinism?

2001 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 979-980 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andy Clark ◽  
Josefa Toribio

While applauding the bulk of the account on offer, we question one apparent implication, namely, that every difference in sensorimotor contingencies corresponds to a difference in conscious visual experience.

2001 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 999-999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zenon W. Pylyshyn

The target article proposes that visual experience arises when sensorimotor contingencies are exploited in perception. This novel analysis of visual experience fares no better than the other proposals that the article rightly dismisses, and for the same reasons. Extracting invariants may be needed for recognition, but it is neither necessary nor sufficient for having a visual experience. While the idea that vision involves the active extraction of sensorimotor invariants has merit, it does not replace the need for perceptual representations. Vision is not just for the immediate controlling of action; it is also for finding out about the world, from which inferences may be drawn and beliefs changed.


2004 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 906-907 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen E. Robbins

Bergson, writing in 1896, anticipated “sensorimotor contingencies” under the concept that perception is “virtual action.” But to explain the external image, he embedded this concept in a holographic framework where time-motion is an indivisible and the relation of subject/object is in terms of time. The target article's account of qualitative visual experience falls short for lack of this larger framework.[Objects] send back, then, to my body, as would a mirror, their eventual influence; they take rank in an order corresponding to the growing or decreasing powers of my body. The objects which surround my body reflect its possible action upon them.– Henri Bergson (1896/1912, pp. 6–7)


2004 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 904-905 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce Bridgeman

Although the sensorimotor account is a significant step forward, it cannot explain experiences of entoptic phenomena that violate normal sensorimotor contingencies but nonetheless are perceived as visual. Nervous system structure limits how they can be interpreted. Neurophysiology, combined with a sensorimotor theory, can account for space constancy by denying the existence of permanent representations of states that must be corrected or updated.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keisuke Suzuki ◽  
David J Schwartzman ◽  
Rafael Augusto ◽  
Anil Seth

To investigate how embodied sensorimotor interactions shape subjective visual experience, we developed a novel combination of Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) within an adapted breaking continuous flash suppression (bCFS) paradigm. In a first experiment, participants manipulated novel virtual 3D objects, viewed through a head-mounted display, using three interlocking cogs. This setup allowed us to manipulate the sensorimotor contingencies governing interactions with virtual objects, while characterising the effects on subjective visual experience by measuring breakthrough times from bCFS. We contrasted the effects of the congruency (veridical versus reversed sensorimotor coupling) and contingency (live versus replayed interactions) using a motion discrimination task. The results showed that the contingency but not congruency of sensorimotor coupling affected breakthrough times, with live interactions displaying faster breakthrough times. In a second experiment, we investigated how the contingency of sensorimotor interactions affected object category discrimination within a more naturalistic setting, using a motion tracker that allowed object interactions with increased degrees of freedom. We again found that breakthrough times were faster for live compared to replayed interactions (contingency effect). Together, these data demonstrate that bCFS breakthrough times for unfamiliar 3D virtual objects are modulated by the contingency of the dynamic causal coupling between actions and their visual consequences, in line with theories of perception that emphasise the influence of sensorimotor contingencies on visual experience. The combination of VR/AR and motion tracking technologies with bCFS provides a novel methodology extending the use of binocular suppression paradigms into more dynamic and realistic sensorimotor environments.


2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (7) ◽  
pp. 1233-1251
Author(s):  
Lisa Jacquey ◽  
Jacqueline Fagard ◽  
Rana Esseily ◽  
J. Kevin O'Regan

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rolf A. Zwaan ◽  
Leonora C. Coppens ◽  
Liselotte Gootjes

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morton A. Heller ◽  
Lindsay J. Wemple ◽  
Tara Riddle ◽  
Erin Fulkerson ◽  
Crystal L. Kranz ◽  
...  

1969 ◽  
Vol 69 (4, Pt.1) ◽  
pp. 644-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert B. McCall ◽  
Michael L. Lester
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 147 (3) ◽  
pp. 444-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Rinaldi ◽  
Tomaso Vecchi ◽  
Micaela Fantino ◽  
Lotfi B. Merabet ◽  
Zaira Cattaneo

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document