ArticleExperimental brain research2019
The dominant role of functional action representation in object recognition.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anticipation (second-order motor planning) is stored in memory - processing of grasp postures in a priming paradigm.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- No need to integrate action information during coarse semantic processing of man-made tools.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2023Article
- Tool use acquisition induces a multifunctional interference effect during object processing: evidence from the sensorimotor mu rhythm.Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- Spatio-Temporal Neural Dynamics of Observing Non-Tool Manipulable Objects and Interactions.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Looking to recognise: the pre-eminence of semantic over sensorimotor processing in human tool use.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- The China Image Set (CIS): A New Set of 551 Colored Photos With Chinese Norms for 12 Psycholinguistic Variables.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Action representation of manipulable objects has been found to be involved in object recognition. Recently, studies have indicated the existence of two distinct action systems: functional action specifying how to use an object and structural action concerning how to grasp an object. Despite evidence revealing the systems' anatomical and functional differences, few preceding studies have dissociated their respective roles in object recognition. The present study aimed to tease apart their roles in the recognition of manipulable objects with a priming paradigm. Specifically, we used static stimuli (photos, Experiments 1 and 2) and dynamic stimuli (video clips, Experiments 3 and 4) depicting functional and structural action hand gestures as primes and measured the magnitude of functional and structural action priming effect in object recognition. We found that static and dynamic priming stimuli induced a robust action priming effect only for functional action prime-target pairs. Naming latencies of the target objects were shorter when functional action representations of the prime and target were congruent than when they were incongruent. Moreover, as compared to static priming photos, dynamic priming stimuli induced a larger functional action priming effect. By contrast, neither static nor dynamic priming stimuli elicited a structural action priming effect. Behavioral data from our four experiments provide consistent evidence of the dominant role of functional action representation in the recognition of manipulable objects, suggesting that action knowledge regarding how to use rather than grasp an object is more likely an intrinsic component of objects' conceptual representation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30413842What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.