Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/32194
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMustile, Magdaen_UK
dc.contributor.authorGiocondo, Floraen_UK
dc.contributor.authorCaligiore, Danieleen_UK
dc.contributor.authorBorghi, Annaen_UK
dc.contributor.authorKourtis, Dimitriosen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-21T01:23:26Z-
dc.date.available2021-01-21T01:23:26Z-
dc.date.issued2021-05en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/32194-
dc.description.abstractPrevious work suggests that perception of an object automatically facilitates actions related to object grasping and manipulation. Recently, the notion of automaticity has been challenged by behavioral studies suggesting that dangerous objects elicit aversive affordances that interfere with encoding of an object’s motor properties; however, related electrophysiological studies have provided little support for these claims. We sought EEG evidence that would support the operation of an inhibitory mechanism that interferes with the motor encoding of dangerous objects and we investigated whether such mechanism would be modulated by the perceived distance of an object and the goal of a given task. Electroencephalograms were recorded by 24 participants who passively perceived dangerous and neutral objects in their peripersonal, boundary or extrapersonal space and performed either a reachability judgment task or a categorization task. Our results showed that greater attention, reflected in the visual P1 potential, was drawn by dangerous and reachable objects. Crucially, a frontal N2 potential, associated with motor inhibition, was larger for dangerous objects only when participants performed a reachability judgment task. Furthermore, a larger parietal P3b potential for dangerous objects indicated the greater difficulty in linking a dangerous object to the appropriate response, especially when it was located in the participants’ extrapersonal space. Taken together, our results show that perception of dangerous objects elicits aversive affordances in a task-dependent way and provides evidence for the operation of a neural mechanism that does not code affordances of dangerous objects automatically, but rather on the basis of contextual information.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technology Press (MIT Press)en_UK
dc.relationMustile M, Giocondo F, Caligiore D, Borghi A & Kourtis D (2021) Motor inhibition to dangerous objects: Electrophysiological evidence for task-dependent aversive affordances. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 33 (5), pp. 826-839. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01690en_UK
dc.rightsThis is the author’s final version. This article has been accepted for publication in Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience published by MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01690en_UK
dc.rights.urihttps://storre.stir.ac.uk/STORREEndUserLicence.pdfen_UK
dc.subjectEEGen_UK
dc.subjectperceptionen_UK
dc.subjectcontextual informationen_UK
dc.subjectobject affordancesen_UK
dc.subjectdangerous objectsen_UK
dc.titleMotor inhibition to dangerous objects: Electrophysiological evidence for task-dependent aversive affordancesen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1162/jocn_a_01690en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleJournal of Cognitive Neuroscienceen_UK
dc.citation.issn1530-8898en_UK
dc.citation.issn0898-929Xen_UK
dc.citation.volume33en_UK
dc.citation.issue5en_UK
dc.citation.spage826en_UK
dc.citation.epage839en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusAM - Accepted Manuscripten_UK
dc.citation.date01/04/2021en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationPsychologyen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationInstitute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologiesen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationInstitute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologiesen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationSapienza University of Romeen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationPsychologyen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000663375400005en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85110455657en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1697327en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-7903-3184en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0003-2535-6196en_UK
dc.date.accepted2021-01-15en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-01-15en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2021-01-20en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionAMen_UK
local.rioxx.authorMustile, Magda|0000-0002-7903-3184en_UK
local.rioxx.authorGiocondo, Flora|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorCaligiore, Daniele|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorBorghi, Anna|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorKourtis, Dimitrios|0000-0003-2535-6196en_UK
local.rioxx.projectInternal Project|University of Stirling|https://isni.org/isni/0000000122484331en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2021-01-20en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttps://storre.stir.ac.uk/STORREEndUserLicence.pdf|2021-01-20|en_UK
local.rioxx.filenameJOCN-2020-0259.R1_Proof.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source1530-8898en_UK
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
JOCN-2020-0259.R1_Proof.pdfFulltext - Accepted Version1.28 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.