ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2021
The influence of skill and task complexity on perception of nested affordances.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2021. 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.
- Making sense together: participatory sensemaking, learning cycles, and group roles.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Effect of Two Types of Open-Skill Training on Cognitive Functions: The Case of Parkour.European journal of sport science · 2025Article
- Towards Automatic Object Detection and Activity Recognition in Indoor Climbing.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Embodied planning in climbing: how pre-planning informs motor execution.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Perceiving affordances and the problem of visually indiscernible kinds.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- The Ecological Dynamics Framework: An Innovative Approach to Performance in Extreme Environments: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated how skill level and task complexity influence the calibration of perception-action and particularly how close an individual acts relative to his or her maximal action capabilities. Complexity was manipulated between two (Touch, Grasp) and more than two (Removing, Moving Up) nested affordance conditions. For all conditions, we examined whether advanced climbers had greater maximal action capabilities than intermediate climbers or whether they better scaled their action (i.e., acted nearer to their maximal action capabilities) or both. Eleven intermediate and 11 advanced male climbers were first asked to estimate the maximum distance that they could reach a climbing hold. The hold was moved along a slide and fixed once requested by the participant; subsequently, the distance to the starting hold was measured. After each estimation, the participant was required to execute the climbing action. After four estimation-action trials in each of the four conditions, the maximal action capability (i.e., actual maximal reaching distance) was determined. Advanced climbers demonstrated greater actual maximal reaching distances than intermediate climbers for all conditions, but they only estimated greater maximal reaching distances for the more complex conditions, which featured more than two nested affordances. When estimated maximal reaching distances were scaled to actual maximal reaching distances, advanced climbers did not differ from intermediate climbers for any condition, and there were no differences between conditions. Our findings indicate that expertise was a function of greater action capabilities, but not due to the accuracy of calibration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.