O change may not be a very useful mechanism for predicting

O change may not be a very useful mechanism for predicting the ongoing movements of others. Two possibilities arise PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19898629 as to how the inserted motion effects this updating of the action simulation: firstly, the biasing hypothesis suggests that briefly presented motion that does not 1268798 temporally match the current state of the action simulation acts to fluidly update it, temporally “pushing” the action simulation in that direction. The second hypothesis suggests that re-simulation occurs: perceiving even a short duration of inserted motion cancels the currently generated action simulation and generates a new one based on the new motion information. Naturally, if the inserted motion matches the old simulation, the new one will roughly match the old one, leading to the expected results, as seen in the 0 ms inserted offset condition described above. However, if the re-simulation is based upon temporally shifted motion, the newly generated simulation will perceptually support “incorrect” continuation test motions. Both of these hypotheses are possible and the current evidence does not conclusively support one or the other (Parkinson et al., 2012). It might seem, on the face of it, that the re-simulation hypothesis is less intuitively sensible, since it would entail that an entirely new action simulation can be accurately generated from only 67 ms of a PLA motion. In fact, this is entirely feasible, as we will see later (Section The Lag Effect: Towards a Higher Temporal Resolution).www.frontiersin.SAR 405 web orgJuly 2013 | Volume 4 | Article 387 |Springer et al.Cognitive underpinnings of action simulationFIGURE 3 | A schematic illustration of a trial with “inserted motion” during the occlusion phase.FIGURE 4 | Percentage correct judgments for the “inserted motion” experiment. Black asterisks connected with solid lines indicate significance levels of between-condition t-test comparisons. Asterisks in gray connected with dotted lines indicate significance levels of one-samplet-test comparisons to chance performance (50 ), p < 0.05, p < 0.01, < 0.001. Figure reproduced from Parkinson et al. (2012, p. 428). Copyright ?Springer Science+Business Media. Reproduced with permission.pTHE LAG EFFECT: TOWARDS A HIGHER TEMPORAL RESOLUTIONWe have described recent research, which, in the first instance, shows the existence of real-time action simulation of human motion (Graf et al., 2007; Parkinson et al., 2011). Secondly, wehave demonstrated an ecologically valid real-world benefit of action simulation, which can act in a top-down fashion to aid human motion detection (Parkinson et al., 2011). Finally, we went on to illustrate the fluid, updatable nature of the simulationFrontiers in Psychology | CognitionJuly 2013 | Volume 4 | Article 387 |Springer et al.Cognitive underpinnings of action simulation(Parkinson et al., 2012). Now, we turn to the investigation of the spatiotemporal accuracy of the action simulation: the more fine-grained nature of how well the simulation can track human motion.Spatial occlusion and the teapot experimentWork by Prinz and Rapinett (2008) attempted to investigate the time-course and accuracy of action simulation by asking how it relates, at first, to simple visual linear extrapolation. They used a novel version of the occluder paradigm, which used actual video footage of people making simple goal-directed motions. The actors of these videos sat facing the viewer but hidden behind a permanently present cardboard occluder (see Figure 5). The moti.O change may not be a very useful mechanism for predicting the ongoing movements of others. Two possibilities arise PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19898629 as to how the inserted motion effects this updating of the action simulation: firstly, the biasing hypothesis suggests that briefly presented motion that does not temporally match the current state of the action simulation acts to fluidly update it, temporally “pushing” the action simulation in that direction. The second hypothesis suggests that re-simulation occurs: perceiving even a short duration of inserted motion cancels the currently generated action simulation and generates a new one based on the new motion information. Naturally, if the inserted motion matches the old simulation, the new one will roughly match the old one, leading to the expected results, as seen in the 0 ms inserted offset condition described above. However, if the re-simulation is based upon temporally shifted motion, the newly generated simulation will perceptually support “incorrect” continuation test motions. Both of these hypotheses are possible and the current evidence does not conclusively support one or the other (Parkinson et al., 2012). It might seem, on the face of it, that the re-simulation hypothesis is less intuitively sensible, since it would entail that an entirely new action simulation can be accurately generated from only 67 ms of a PLA motion. In fact, this is entirely feasible, as we will see later (Section The Lag Effect: Towards a Higher Temporal Resolution).www.frontiersin.orgJuly 2013 | Volume 4 | Article 387 |Springer et al.Cognitive underpinnings of action simulationFIGURE 3 | A schematic illustration of a trial with “inserted motion” during the occlusion phase.FIGURE 4 | Percentage correct judgments for the “inserted motion” experiment. Black asterisks connected with solid lines indicate significance levels of between-condition t-test comparisons. Asterisks in gray connected with dotted lines indicate significance levels of one-samplet-test comparisons to chance performance (50 ), p < 0.05, p < 0.01, < 0.001. Figure reproduced from Parkinson et al. (2012, p. 428). Copyright ?Springer Science+Business Media. Reproduced with permission.pTHE LAG EFFECT: TOWARDS A HIGHER TEMPORAL RESOLUTIONWe have described recent research, which, in the first instance, shows the existence of real-time action simulation of human motion (Graf et al., 2007; Parkinson et al., 2011). Secondly, wehave demonstrated an ecologically valid real-world benefit of action simulation, which can act in a top-down fashion to aid human motion detection (Parkinson et al., 2011). Finally, we went on to illustrate the fluid, updatable nature of the simulationFrontiers in Psychology | CognitionJuly 2013 | Volume 4 | Article 387 |Springer et al.Cognitive underpinnings of action simulation(Parkinson et al., 2012). Now, we turn to the investigation of the spatiotemporal accuracy of the action simulation: the more fine-grained nature of how well the simulation can track human motion.Spatial occlusion and the teapot experimentWork by Prinz and Rapinett (2008) attempted to investigate the time-course and accuracy of action simulation by asking how it relates, at first, to simple visual linear extrapolation. They used a novel version of the occluder paradigm, which used actual video footage of people making simple goal-directed motions. The actors of these videos sat facing the viewer but hidden behind a permanently present cardboard occluder (see Figure 5). The moti.