Realistic and complex visual chasing behaviors trigger the perception of intentionality.
We not only perceive the physical state of the environment, but also the causal structures underlying the physical state. Determining whether an object has intentionality is a key component of this process. Among all possible intentions, the intention that has arguably been studied the most is chasi...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2023-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284485 |
| _version_ | 1797839121438212096 |
|---|---|
| author | Mohan Ji Emily J Ward C Shawn Green |
| author_facet | Mohan Ji Emily J Ward C Shawn Green |
| author_sort | Mohan Ji |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | We not only perceive the physical state of the environment, but also the causal structures underlying the physical state. Determining whether an object has intentionality is a key component of this process. Among all possible intentions, the intention that has arguably been studied the most is chasing-often via a reasonably simple and stereotyped computer algorithm ("heat-seeking"). The current study investigated the perception of multiple types of chasing approaches and thus whether it is the intention of chasing that triggers the perception of chasing, whether the chasing agent and the agent being chased play equally important roles, and whether the perception of chasing requires the presence of both agents. We implemented a well-studied wolf chasing a sheep paradigm where participants viewed recordings of a disc (the wolf) chasing another disc (the sheep) among other distracting discs. We manipulated the types of chasing algorithms, the density of the distractors, the target agent in the task, and the presence of the agent being chased. We found that the participants could successfully identify the chasing agent in all conditions where both agents were present, albeit with different levels of performance (e.g., participants were best at detecting the chasing agent when the chasing agent engaged in a direct chasing strategy and were worst at detecting a human-controlled chasing agent). This work therefore extends our understanding of the types of cues that are and are not utilized by the visual system to detect the chasing intention. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T15:53:06Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-81b7434e4e094d3cbb56a057227c68ff |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T15:53:06Z |
| publishDate | 2023-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj.art-81b7434e4e094d3cbb56a057227c68ff2023-04-26T05:31:44ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032023-01-01184e028448510.1371/journal.pone.0284485Realistic and complex visual chasing behaviors trigger the perception of intentionality.Mohan JiEmily J WardC Shawn GreenWe not only perceive the physical state of the environment, but also the causal structures underlying the physical state. Determining whether an object has intentionality is a key component of this process. Among all possible intentions, the intention that has arguably been studied the most is chasing-often via a reasonably simple and stereotyped computer algorithm ("heat-seeking"). The current study investigated the perception of multiple types of chasing approaches and thus whether it is the intention of chasing that triggers the perception of chasing, whether the chasing agent and the agent being chased play equally important roles, and whether the perception of chasing requires the presence of both agents. We implemented a well-studied wolf chasing a sheep paradigm where participants viewed recordings of a disc (the wolf) chasing another disc (the sheep) among other distracting discs. We manipulated the types of chasing algorithms, the density of the distractors, the target agent in the task, and the presence of the agent being chased. We found that the participants could successfully identify the chasing agent in all conditions where both agents were present, albeit with different levels of performance (e.g., participants were best at detecting the chasing agent when the chasing agent engaged in a direct chasing strategy and were worst at detecting a human-controlled chasing agent). This work therefore extends our understanding of the types of cues that are and are not utilized by the visual system to detect the chasing intention.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284485 |
| spellingShingle | Mohan Ji Emily J Ward C Shawn Green Realistic and complex visual chasing behaviors trigger the perception of intentionality. PLoS ONE |
| title | Realistic and complex visual chasing behaviors trigger the perception of intentionality. |
| title_full | Realistic and complex visual chasing behaviors trigger the perception of intentionality. |
| title_fullStr | Realistic and complex visual chasing behaviors trigger the perception of intentionality. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Realistic and complex visual chasing behaviors trigger the perception of intentionality. |
| title_short | Realistic and complex visual chasing behaviors trigger the perception of intentionality. |
| title_sort | realistic and complex visual chasing behaviors trigger the perception of intentionality |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284485 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mohanji realisticandcomplexvisualchasingbehaviorstriggertheperceptionofintentionality AT emilyjward realisticandcomplexvisualchasingbehaviorstriggertheperceptionofintentionality AT cshawngreen realisticandcomplexvisualchasingbehaviorstriggertheperceptionofintentionality |