Changes in visually guided responses, including spatial judgments of object or limb position, which result from optical transformation of visual input are usually referred to as adaptation. The purpose of this paper is to show that the response changes observed in adaptation can be conceptualized as resulting from at least three distinct components—behavioral compensation, sensory adaptation, and visual shift. Data from a series of experiments show the nature of the interaction of behavioral compensation and sensory adaptation. Implications of this latter finding for intermanual transfer are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AschS. E.WitkinH. A., 1948, “Studies in space orientation. II. Perception of the upright with displaced visual fields and with body tilted”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 455–477.
2.
AustinM., 1967, “Studies in perceptual spatial adaptation and its aftereffects”, Ph.D. Thesis (unpublished), University of Sydney.
3.
AustinM.SingerG.DayR. H., 1969, “Visual orientation illusion following judgments with a tilted visual field”, Nature, 221, 583–584.
4.
CollinsJ. K., 1967, “Proprioceptive space perception: A study of the muscular component in the position sense”, Ph.D. Thesis (unpublished), University of Sydney.
5.
DayR. H.SingerG., 1964, “Spatial aftereffects within and between kinesthetics and vision”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 337–343.
6.
DayR. H.SingerG., 1967, “Sensory adaptation and behavioral compensation with spatially transformed vision and hearing”, Psychological Bulletin, 67, 307–322.
7.
DayR. H.WadeN. J., 1966, “Visual spatial aftereffect from prolonged head tilt”, Science, 154, 1201–1202.
8.
DayR. H.WadeN. J., 1968, “Involvement of neck proprioceptive system in visual after-effect from prolonged heat tilt”, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 290–293.
9.
FestingerL.BurnhamC. A.OnoH.BamberD., 1967, “Efference and the conscious experience of perception”, Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph, 74 (4), 1–36.
10.
FoleyJ. E.MaynesF. J., 1969, “Comparison of training methods in the production of prism adaptation”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 151–155.
GibsonJ. J.RadnerM., 1937, “Adaptation, after-effect and contrast in the perception of tilted lines, I and II”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 453–467.
13.
HammerE. R., 1949, “Temporal factors in figural aftereffects”, American Journal of Psychology, 62, 337–354.
14.
HardtM. E.HeldR.SteinbachJ., 1971, “Adaptation to displaced vision: A change in the central control of sensorimotor coordination”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89, 229–239.
15.
HayJ. C.PickH. L.Jr., 1966, “Visual and proprioceptive adaptation to optical displacement of the visual stimulus”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 150–158.
16.
HowardI. P., 1968, “Displacing the optical array”, in The Neuropsychology of Spatially Oriented Behavior, Ed. FreedmanS. J. (Dorsey Press, Homewood, Illinois), 19–36.
17.
KalilR. E.FreedmanS. J., 1966, “Persistence of ocular rotation following compensation for displaced vision”, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 22, 135–139.
18.
KöhlerW.WallachH., 1944, “Figural aftereffects: An investigation of visual processes”, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 88, 269–357.
19.
McLaughlinS. C.RifkinK. I.WebsterR. G., 1966, “Oculomotor adaptation to wedge prisms with no part of the body seen”, Perception & Psychophysics, 1, 452–458.
20.
McLaughlinS. C.WebsterR. G., 1967, “Changes in straight-ahead eye position during adaptation to wedge prisms”, Perception & Psychophysics, 2, 37–44.
21.
MottramJ. E.PurcellA. T.WallaceM., 1968, “Intermanual transfer in the tilted room”, paper presented at the Fourteenth Canberra Symposium on Perception, Canberra.
22.
OverR., 1966, “An experimentally induced conflict between vision and proprioception”, British Journal of Psychology, 57, 335–341.
23.
OverR., 1967, “Effect of the angle of tilt of the inspection figure on the magnitude of a kinesthetic aftereffect”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74, 249–253.
24.
RockI., 1966, The Nature of Perceptual Adaptation (Basic Books, New York).
25.
RockI.GoldbergJ.MackA., 1966, “Immediate correction and adaptation based on viewing a prismatically displaced scene”, Perception & Psychophysics, 1, 351–354.
26.
SingerG., 1968, “The influence of two varieties of proprioceptive information on judgments of the spatial position of an object while the visual input is transformed”, Psychonomic Science, 11, 295–296.
27.
SingerG.DayR. H., 1966a, “Sensory and perceptual adaptation with aftereffect: Evidence for two processes”, in Perceptual Development: Its Relation to Theories of Intelligence & Cognition, Ed. JenkinN., Institute of Juvenile Research, Chicago, Illinois, pp. 187–209.
28.
SingerG.DayR. H., 1966b, “The effects of spatial judgments on the perceptual aftereffect resulting from prismatically transformed vision”, Australian Journal of Psychology, 18, 63–70.
29.
SingerG.DayR. H., 1966c, “Spatial adaptation and aftereffect with optically transformed vision: Effects of active and passive responding and the relationship between test and exposure responses”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 725–731.
30.
SnyderF. W.PronkoN. H., 1952, Vision with Spatial Inversion (McCormick-Armstrong, Kansas).
31.
TaubE., 1968, “Prism compensation as a learning phenomenon: A Phylogenetic perspective”, in The Neuropsychology of Spatially Oriented Behavior, Ed. FreedmanS. J. (Dorsey Press, Homewood, Illinois).
32.
ThurnerF., 1967, Studies of Artificially Disturbed Sensory Coordination in Man (Institut für Psychologie der Universität Innsbruck, Austria).
33.
WalkerE. L., 1967, Conditioning and Instrumental Learning (Brooks/Cole Publishing, Belmont).
34.
WoosterM., 1923, “Certain factors in the development of a new spatial coordination”, Psychological Monographs, 32, whole No. 146.
