Term Paper Perception Action And Brain

Running head: Perception Action and Brain 1

Perception Action and Brain

First Name Last Name

Institution

Perception Action and Brain

Introduction

Human behaviour and actions are constantly altered to match the environmental changes within

the social settings. In order for the brain to carry this out, it needs to effectively and quickly

process the received sensor information and also match with the forecast according to the current

intentions and actions. Therefore, it is clear that there is a close connection between action and

perception hence regulation of the brain processes that form the bases of perception assists

individuals in achieving their goals within the constantly changing environment. Based on the

current theories, there is an indication that flow of information is not only limited to form

perception to action rather it can also flow from action to perception. In this case, forecasting based

on a person’s actions and intentions can influence how they perceive the actions of the others. The

aim of this paper is to explore between the brain and individual’s perception and actions.

Literature review

According to Bedny & Caramazza, (2011), the earliest hypothetical system on the link between

perception and action is the ide motor hypothesis. It proposes that activities and inward pictures

of activities are firmly connected and that activities are illustrated by their sensory outcomes.

Expanding upon these essential thoughts two generally referenced hypotheses have been used with

the first one being the common coding hypothesis and also the hypothesis of activity coding. As

indicated by these speculations, in a general sense similar territories of the cerebrum are associated

with seeing and planning an activity. The common coding hypothesis does not entirely characterize

how data streams inside this system. It is neither prescient nor postdictive for the same reason.

This is because it is indistinguishable nature makes the normal coding hypothesis sufficiently

Perception Action and Brain

adaptable to disclose a few characteristics identified with perception-action and action perception

links. With that said, it isn't precisely clear on how and why diverse codes end up dynamic or on

the other hand dormant in any given circumstance and therefore it is in this manner which is

difficult to survey the legitimacy of this hypothesis experimentally.

This leads to the direct matching theory. Kay & Kelso (2016) states that based on this theory an

action is clearly understood when it triggers the observer's brain to resonate. This theory states that

actions are merely a mirroring process of simulation that creates the path towards properly

grasping what has been observed through the automatic mapping of the actions on to the observer's

brain. Directly viewing the direct matching theory indicates that is merely postdictive such that

the observe projects backwards with the aim of meeting the intended goals experienced previously

when carrying out the same action. For instance, where one sees somebody picking up cup triggers

the brain to match the particular action with right brain activity and identifying what the main aim

is which could be drinking or putting the cup away. However according to Yang et al (2015), single

cell recordings also show mirror neurons that illustrate stimulation in relations to the action

sequence taking place. The findings show that mirror neurons have the capacity to uphold a more

predictive and complex technique of grasping actions compared to the procedure prescribed by the

direct matching principal. Moving on to the predictive models of perception-action and the brain,

Heuer & Sanders (2016) suggest that a group of theories can be forecasted and also add that

mirroring of actions can be used in predicting the potential actions, sensory states and goals which

helps in preparing the brain to proves the expected information to be relayed. These models are

primarily centred on the concept of mental simulation and internal forward models. The

predictions resulting from the perception are fed forwards to help influence the manner in which

the brain processes the sensory information.

Perception Action and Brain

In outline, there are three principal theories that hypotheses on how perceptions and actions are

connected. The common coding hypothesis is one of the broadly utilized hypothesis to clarify how

the engine framework can impact discernment. Nonetheless, this hypothesis does not characterize

clearly the system’s fundamental how and why diverse portrayals end up dynamic amid action

observation. Interestingly, the direct matching theory portrays a feed-forward nature of data stream

amid activity perception, where low level parts of an activity are coordinated to high level activity

portrayals and objectives so as to comprehend other people’s actions. This hypothesis keeps up

that objectives and expectations are extricated from observed activities and for the most part in a

postdictive way (Heuer & Sanders, 2016). Interestingly, prescient speculations suggest that the

brain is able to predict the future events, in view of expectations about other people’s objectives

and goals. Forward models at that point decipher these forecasts of goals to anticipate sensory

illustrations that can impact the way an individual perceive the observed activities.

The thought that data from the motor framework can impact recognition is in entire differentiation

with conventional perspectives of brain association, in which sensory frameworks are viewed as

the input channel while the brain is considered the output channel. These impacts of activities on

observation can be separated into two classes, one categorizing to what long-run changes in the

motor framework with the ability to learn or how a motor shortfall can impact perception while

the other concentrates on continuous impacts whereby our motor designs or expectations can adjust

an individual’s perception.

Significant evidence indicates that in respect to the impact of the motor framework on discernment

comes for the patients within which a dysfunctional motor system can affect the recognition of

actions. For instance, stroke patients with motor shortcomings on their upper appendage not just

show hindrance in activity perception, however, such hindrance is essentially more grounded when

Perception Action and Brain

it compares to the hemiplegic arm (Heuer & Sanders, 2016). So also, paraplegic patients suffering

from a significant spinal damage are altogether hindered in distinguishing the bearing of object

movement in point-light walkers in contrast to healthy individuals. Shortfalls in motor planning

have likewise been illustrated to debilitate the capacity to separate the other people’s gestures.

Apraxia patients, who show impairment in participating in complicated movements after a stroke,

demonstrate a solid relationship between motor shortfall and the capacity to perceive and see

movements and in that case, the authors call attention to the fact that, at a personal level, a properly

working motor system isn't generally vital for recognizing objects or actions.

Argument

Based on the above literature review there is sufficient evidence that the motor framework is not

responsible for receiving information from the sensory parts of the brain but also it has a level of

influence on the sensory processes and as such manipulates an individual’s perception. The impact

of these actions on perception can be categorized into two groups which are the effects of the motor

skills on the consequent perception and secondly the short-term effects of the executed or planned

actions on perception arising from the concurrently observed stimuli. Some of the studies have

stipulated that the motor skills can facilitate visual perception based on concurrent stimulus.

Looking at the common coding hypothesis that proposes that repetitively coupled actions and

consequences of the sensory part of the brain can add strength to the common codes while at the

same time actualizing perceptual performance during the associated actions. However, an

interference can result whereby the perceived sensory information and the anticipatory impacts of

actions are activated simultaneously. An interference can result in the diminishing of perceptual

performance (Di Russo et al, 2016). Additionally, the common coding theory does not clearly

illustrate why the simultaneously performed actions can interfere with the perception. On the other

Perception Action and Brain

hand, the direct matching theory illustrates that a low-level visual information pertaining to the

performed actions are mirrored on to the witness’s motor framework whereby the aim of the action

is decoding.

Clearly, the direct matching theory is postdictive in nature due to placing more emphasis on the

information flow from the visual to the cognitive sections which makes it hard to elaborate how

actions may trigger a feed-forward effect on a person’s perception. I can also make an argument

that predictive models are best suited in explaining the various ways in which the motor system

can affect an individual’s overall perception. The models indicate that a planned action pertaining

to the observed action can result in an anticipation of the sensory representation of the

consequences of the actions.

According to this hypothesis, when preparing for an event, the brain has the ability to predict what

we are going to hear and consequently what we will feel during those events. It also leads us to

predict other peoples objectives based solely on their actions (Di Russo et al, 2016). The constant

transfer of information between the high-level cognitive sections of the brain, the sensory and

motor system makes it possible to anticipate an action and also expect the sensory consequences

of a given action. Gaining more skills on some motor activities is more effective in predicting the

sensory outcomes of the said events.

In conclusion, In conclusion, the paper has explored some of the existing studies on the relationship

between a visual perception and action encoded in the motor system which involve a review of the

three principal theories that are used to describe the relationship. They claim that when observing

and executing an action, an individual is usually predicting the future and representing the

anticipated sensory system states. Therefore action perception highlights one of the main

functioning of the human brain.

Perception Action and Brain

References

Bedny, M., & Caramazza, A. (2011). Perception, action, and word meanings in the human brain:

The case from action verbs. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1224(1), 81-

95.

Kay, B. A., & Kelso, J. A. S. (2016). Information and control: A macroscopic analysis of

perception-action coupling. In Perspectives on perception and action (pp. 17-46).

Routledge.

Heuer, H., & Sanders, A. (Eds.). (2016). Perspectives on perception and action. Routledge.

Di Russo, F., Lucci, G., Sulpizio, V., Berchicci, M., Spinelli, D., Pitzalis, S., & Galati, G. (2016).

Spatiotemporal brain mapping during preparation, perception, and action. NeuroImage,

126, 1-14.

Yang, D. Y. J., Rosenblau, G., Keifer, C., & Pelphrey, K. A. (2015). An integrative neural model

of social perception, action observation, and theory of mind. Neuroscience &

Biobehavioral Reviews, 51, 263-275.

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Paper type

Deadline

Page count

550 words

Total price: $ 15.00

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

USA, Student

"I'm fully satisfied with the essay I've just received. When I read it, I felt like it was exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the necessary words. Thank you!"

Ian McGregor

UK, Student

"I don’t know what I would do without your assistance! With your help, I met my deadline just in time and the work was very professional. I will be back in several days with another assignment!"

Shannon Williams

Canada, Student

"It was the perfect experience! I enjoyed working with my writer, he delivered my work on time and followed all the guidelines about the referencing and contents."

Term Paper Perception Action and Brain

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

Ian McGregor

Shannon Williams