Modes of Linkage Between Perception and Action

  • Wolfgang Prinz

Abstract

The problem of understanding the nature of the linkage between perception and action can be raised at two different levels: execution and initiation. At the level of execution the linkage problem is mainly related to the conditions and mechanisms of interaction between efferent and afferent information during the execution of a given movement or response. Relevant issues such as open vs. closed loop control or feed backward vs. feed forward have recently attracted considerable interest in the field of motor learning and motor control (e.g., Adams, 1971; Schmidt, 1975; Keele, 1981; see also Shebilske and Wolff, this volume).

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, J.A. A closed-loop theory of motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 1971, 3, 111–149.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Allport, D.A. Patterns and actions: Cognitive mechanisms are content-specific. In G. Claxton (Ed.), Cognitive psychology — New directions. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980.Google Scholar
  3. Berlyne, D.E. Attention as a problem in behavioral theory. In D.I. Mostofsky (Ed.), Attention: Contemporary theory and analysis. New York: Appleton Century Crofts, 1970.Google Scholar
  4. Höffding, H. Ueber Wiedererkennen, Association und psychische Activität. Vierteljahrsschrift ßr Wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 1889,13, 420–458; 1890,14, 27–54, 167–205, 293–316.Google Scholar
  5. Keele, S.W. Behavioral analysis of movement. In V. Brooks (Ed.), Handbook of physiology, (Vol. 3), Motor control Bethesda, MD: American Physiological Society, 1981.Google Scholar
  6. Lovejoy, E. Attention in discrimination learning. San Francisco: Holden-Day, 1968.Google Scholar
  7. Neisser, U. Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton Century Crofts, 1967.Google Scholar
  8. Newell, A. Production systems: Models of control structures. In W.G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing. New York: Academic Press, 1973.Google Scholar
  9. Prinz, W. Selectivity in character classification. In R.S. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance V III. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1980.Google Scholar
  10. Prinz, W. Wahrnehmungund Tatigkeitssteuerung. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer, 1983.Google Scholar
  11. Sanders, A.F. Stage analysis of reaction processes. In G.E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Tutorials in motor behavior. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1980.Google Scholar
  12. Schmidt, R.A. A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological Review, 1975, 82, 225–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sternberg, S. Two operations in character recognition: Some evidence from reaction time measurements. Perception and Psychophysics, 1967, 2, 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sternberg, S. The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders’ method. In W.G. Koster (Ed.), Attention and performance III. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1969; Acta Psychologica, 1969, 30, 276–315.Google Scholar
  15. Trabasso, T., & Bower, G.H. Attention in learning: Theory and research. Huntington, NY: Krieger, 1975.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wolfgang Prinz

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations