Citation

Rosenbaum DA, Feghhi I. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 2019; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, University of California, Riverside, CA, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.3758/s13414-018-01647-7

PMID

30617768

Abstract

The science of mental life and behavior has paid scant attention to the means by which mental life is translated into physical behavior. Why this is so was the topic of a 2005 American Psychologist article whose main title was "The Cinderella of Psychology." In the present article, we briefly review some of the reasons why motor control was relegated to the sidelines of psychology. Then we point to work showing that experimental psychologists have much to contribute to research on action generation. We focus on studies showing that actions are generated in a way that, at least by default, minimize changes between successive actions. The method is computationally as well as physically economical but also requires consideration of costs, including costs of different kinds. How such costs are compared is discussed in the next section. The final section offers comments about the future of psychologically focused action research. Two additional themes of the review concern methods for studying action generation. First, much can be learned through naturalistic observation. Second, subsequent experiments, designed to check naturalistic observations, can use very simple equipment and procedures. This can make the study of action generation easy to pursue in the psychology laboratory.

Language: en

Keywords

Memory: Visual working and shortterm memory; Motor control; Perception and action