Does it still fit? – Adapting affordance judgments to altered body properties in young and older adults

Autoři: Lisa Finkel aff001;  Katharina Schmidt aff001;  Jean Patrick Philippe Scheib aff001;  Jennifer Randerath aff001
Působiště autorů: Department of Psychology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany aff001;  Lurija Institute for Rehabilitation Science and Health Research, Kliniken Schmieder, Allensbach, Germany aff002
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(12)
Kategorie: Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226729


Actor-related affordance judgments are decisions about potential actions that arise from environmental as well as bodily and cognitive conditions. The system can be challenged by sudden changes to otherwise rather stable actor references e.g. due to accidental bodily injuries or due to brain damage and resulting motor and cognitive constraints. The current study investigated adaptation to suddenly artificially altered body properties and its reversibility in healthy young versus older adults. Participants were asked to judge whether they would be able to fit their hand through a given horizontal opening (Aperture Task). Body alterations were induced by equipping participants with one hand splint for 24 hours that enlarged the hand in width and height. Participants were tested before and directly after putting the splint on as well as after a habituation period of 24 hours. To assess reversibility, participants were tested again directly after removing the splint and one day later. Judgment accuracy values and detection theory measures were reported. Both, young and older adults judged more conservatively when body properties were altered compared to initial judgments for normal body properties. Especially older adults showed major difficulties in such quick adaptation. Older adults’ judgment accuracy as well as perceptual sensitivity were significantly lowered when body properties were suddenly altered. Importantly, lowered judgment performance occurred for both, the splinted as well as the non-splinted hand in older adults. Only after 24 hours of habituation, older adults tended to regain initial performance levels showing adaptive behavior to the altered condition. Removing the hand splint for one day was sufficient to reverse these adaptive effects. Our study results suggest that aging slows down adaptation to sudden bodily alterations affecting actor-related affordance judgments. We propose that these altered processes may go along with uncertainty and a heightened concern about potential consequences of misjudgments. Clearly, future studies are needed to further elucidate the underlying processes of adaptation in affordance judgments. These may reveal major implications for the aging society and its associated problems with an increased risk of falling or stroke related bodily constraints.

Klíčová slova:

Age groups – Brain damage – Cognition – Elderly – Sensory perception – stroke – Young adults


1. Gibson JJ. The theory of affordances. In: Shaw RE, Bransford J, editors. Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1977.

2. Gibson JJ. The ecological approach to visual perception: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1986.

3. Finkel L, Engler S, Randerath J. Does it fit?–Trainability of affordance judgments in young and older adults. PLOS ONE. 2019;14(2):e0212709. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212709 30817755

4. Robinovitch SN, Cronin T. Perception of postural limits in elderly nursing home and day care participants. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1999;54(3):B124–30; discussion B31. Epub 1999/04/07. doi: 10.1093/gerona/54.3.b124 10191836.

5. Konczak J, Meeuwsen HJ, Cress ME. Changing affordances in stair climbing: the perception of maximum climbability in young and older adults. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1992;18(3):691–7. Epub 1992/08/01. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.18.3.691 1500869.

6. Cesari P, Formenti F, Olivato P. A common perceptual parameter for stair climbing for children, young and old adults. Hum Mov Sci. 2003;22(1):111–24. Epub 2003/03/08. doi: 10.1016/s0167-9457(03)00003-4 12623183.

7. Oxley JA, Ihsen E, Fildes BN, Charlton JL, Day RH. Crossing roads safely: an experimental study of age differences in gap selection by pedestrians. Accid Anal Prev. 2005;37(5):962–71. Epub 2005/07/05. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2005.04.017 15993827.

8. Zivotofsky AZ, Eldror E, Mandel R, Rosenbloom T. Misjudging their own steps: why elderly people have trouble crossing the road. Hum Factors. 2012;54(4):600–7. Epub 2012/08/23. doi: 10.1177/0018720812447945 22908683.

9. Hackney AL, Cinelli ME. Action strategies of older adults walking through apertures. Gait Posture. 2011;33(4):733–6. Epub 2011/03/25. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.02.019 21429749.

10. Comalli D, Franchak JM, Char A, Adolph KE. Ledge and wedge: younger and older adults' perception of action possibilities. Exp Brain Res. 2013;228(2):183–92. Epub 2013/05/11. doi: 10.1007/s00221-013-3550-0 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3756555. 23660744

11. Kelly-Hayes M. Influence of age and health behaviors on stroke risk: lessons from longitudinal studies. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2010;58 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S325–S8. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02915.x 21029062.

12. Chen RL, Balami JS, Esiri MM, Chen LK, Buchan AM. Ischemic stroke in the elderly: an overview of evidence. Nature reviews Neurology. 2010;6(5):256–65. Epub 2010/04/07. doi: 10.1038/nrneurol.2010.36 20368741.

13. Wagman JB. Perception of maximum reaching height reflects impending changes in reaching ability and improvements transfer to unpracticed reaching tasks. Experimental brain research. 2012:1–10.

14. Stefanucci JK, Geuss MN. Duck! Scaling the height of a horizontal barrier to body height. Attention Perception & Psychophysics. 2010;72(5):1338–49. doi: 10.3758/app.72.5.1338 WOS:000282067200015. 20601715

15. Franchak JM, Adolph KE. Gut estimates: Pregnant women adapt to changing possibilities for squeezing through doorways. Attention Perception & Psychophysics. 2014;76(2):460–72. doi: 10.3758/s13414-013-0578-y WOS:000334493200015. 24338434

16. Higuchi T, Cinelli ME, Greig MA, Patla AE. Locomotion through apertures when wider space for locomotion is necessary: adaptation to artificially altered bodily states. Exp Brain Res. 2006;175(1):50–9. Epub 2006/06/09. doi: 10.1007/s00221-006-0525-4 16761139.

17. Ishak S, Adolph KE, Lin GC. Perceiving affordances for fitting through apertures. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2008;34(6):1501–14. Epub 2008/12/03. 2008-16831-012 [pii] doi: 10.1037/a0011393 19045989; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2660607.

18. Wagman JB, Morgan LL. Nested prospectivity in perception: Perceived maximum reaching height reflects anticipated changes in reaching ability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2010;17(6):905–9. doi: 10.3758/pbr.17.6.905 WOS:000285865600023. 21169588

19. Wagman JB, Thomas BJ, McBride DM, Day BM. Perception of Maximum Reaching Height When the Means of Reaching Are No Longer in View. Ecological Psychology. 2013;25(1):63–80. doi: 10.1080/10407413.2013.753810 WOS:000314349200002.

20. Regia-Corte T, Wagman JB. Perception of affordances for standing on an inclined surface depends on height of center of mass. Exp Brain Res. 2008;191(1):25–35. Epub 2008/07/30. doi: 10.1007/s00221-008-1492-8 18663440.

21. Stoffregen TA, Yang CM, Bardy BG. Affordance judgments and nonlocomotor body movement. Ecological Psychology. 2005;17(2):75–104. doi: 10.1207/s15326969eco1702_2 WOS:000231480200002.

22. Mark LS. Eyeheight-scaled information about affordances: a study of sitting and stair climbing. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1987;13(3):361–70. Epub 1987/08/01. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.13.3.361 2958585.

23. Mark LS, Balliett JA, Craver KD, Douglas SD, Fox T. What an actor must do in order to perceive the affordance for sitting. Ecological Psychology. 1990;2(4):325–66.

24. Franchak JM. Exploratory behaviors and recalibration: What processes are shared between functionally similar affordances? Attention, perception & psychophysics. 2017;79(6):1816–29. Epub 2017/05/27. doi: 10.3758/s13414-017-1339-0 28547681.

25. Yasuda M, Wagman JB, Higuchi T. Can perception of aperture passability be improved immediately after practice in actual passage? Dissociation between walking and wheelchair use. Exp Brain Res. 2014;232(3):753–64. Epub 2013/12/07. doi: 10.1007/s00221-013-3785-9 24306437.

26. Horn JL, Cattell RB. Age differences in fluid and crystallized intelligence. Acta psychologica. 1967;26:107–29. doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(67)90011-x 6037305

27. Salthouse TA. Selective review of cognitive aging. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society: JINS. 2010;16(5):754–60. doi: 10.1017/S1355617710000706 PMC3637655. 20673381

28. Goodpaster BH, Park SW, Harris TB, Kritchevsky SB, Nevitt M, Schwartz AV, et al. The loss of skeletal muscle strength, mass, and quality in older adults: the health, aging and body composition study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006;61(10):1059–64. Epub 2006/11/02. doi: 10.1093/gerona/61.10.1059 17077199.

29. Higuchi T, Takada H, Matsuura Y, Imanaka K. Visual estimation of spatial requirements for locomotion in novice wheelchair users. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2004;10(1):55–66. Epub 2004/04/01. doi: 10.1037/1076-898X.10.1.55 15053702.

30. Randerath J, Frey SH. Diagnostics and Training of Affordance Perception in Healthy Young—Adults Implications for Post-Stroke Neurorehabilitation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2016;9. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00674 WOS:000367648500001. 26778995

31. Macmillan NA, Creelman CD. Detection theory: A user's guide, 2nd ed. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 2004. xix, 492–xix, p.

32. Green DM, Swets JA. Signal detection theory and psychophysics: Wiley New York; 1966.

33. Fox JR. A signal detection analysis of audio/video redundancy effects in television news video. Communication Research. 2004;31(5):524–36.

34. Randerath J, Finkel L, Shigaki C, Burris J, Nanda A, Hwang P, et al. Does it fit?–Impaired affordance perception after stroke. Neuropsychologia. 2018;108:92–102. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.11.031 29203202

35. Salmaso D, Longoni AM. Hand preference in an Italian sample. Perceptual and Motor skills. 1983;57(3f):1039–42.

36. Kalbe E, Kessler J, Calabrese P, Smith R, Passmore A, Brand Ma, et al. DemTect: a new, sensitive cognitive screening test to support the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and early dementia. International journal of geriatric psychiatry. 2004;19(2):136–43. doi: 10.1002/gps.1042 14758579

37. Kessler J, Calabrese P, Kalbe E, Berger F. DemTect: A new screening method to support diagnosis of dementia. Psycho. 2000;26:343–7.

38. Kessler J, Fengler S, Kaesberg S, Müller K, Calabrese P, Ellwein T, et al. DemTect 40– und DemTect 80+: Neue Auswertungsroutinen für diese Altersgruppen. Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr. 2014;82(11):640–5. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1385278 25383931

39. Bootsma RJ, Bakker FC, Van Snippenberg FJ, Tdlohreg CW. The effects of anxiety on perceiving the reachability of passing objects. Ecological Psychology. 1992;4(1):1–16. doi: 10.1080/10407413.1992.10530790 1992-37835-001.

40. Cornus S, Montagne G, Laurent M. Perception of a stepping-across affordance. Ecological Psychology. 1999;11(4):249–67. doi: 10.1207/s15326969eco1104_1 WOS:000084335300001.

41. Smith J, Pepping G-J. Effects of Affordance Perception on the Initiation and Actualization of Action. Ecological Psychology. 2010;22(2):119–49. doi: 10.1080/10407411003720080

42. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988.

43. Fritz CO, Morris PE, Richler JJ. Effect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2012;141(1):2–18. Epub 2011/08/10. doi: 10.1037/a0024338 21823805.

44. Randerath J, Finkel L, Shigaki C, Burris J, Nanda A, Hwang P, et al. Is this within reach? Left but not right brain damage affects affordance judgment tendencies. Submitted.

45. Shimoyama I, Ninchoji T, Uemura K. The finger-tapping test: a quantitative analysis. Archives of neurology. 1990;47(6):681. doi: 10.1001/archneur.1990.00530060095025 2346396

46. van Dyck CH, Avery RA, MacAvoy MG, Marek KL, Quinlan DM, Baldwin RM, et al. Striatal dopamine transporters correlate with simple reaction time in elderly subjects. Neurobiology of aging. 2008;29(8):1237–46. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2007.02.012 PMC3523216. 17363113

47. Klencklen G, Despres O, Dufour A. What do we know about aging and spatial cognition? Reviews and perspectives. Ageing Res Rev. 2012;11(1):123–35. Epub 2011/11/17. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2011.10.001 22085884.

48. Apraxia Goldenberg G. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science. 2013;4(5):453–62. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1241

49. Buchmann I, Randerath J. Selection and application of familiar and novel tools in patients with left and right hemispheric stroke: Psychometrics and normative data. Cortex. 2017;94:49–62. Epub 2017/07/18. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2017.06.001 28711817.

50. Buxbaum LJ, Randerath J. Limb apraxia and the left parietal lobe. In: Vallar G, Coslett HB, editors. Handbook of Clinical Neurology. 151: Elsevier; 2018. p. 349–63. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-63622-5.00017-6 29519468

51. Karnath HO, Rennig J, Johannsen L, Rorden C. The anatomy underlying acute versus chronic spatial neglect: a longitudinal study. Brain. 2011;134(3):903.

52. Ferber S, Karnath HO. How to Assess Spatial Neglect—Line Bisection or Cancellation Tasks? Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology. 2001;23(5):599–607. doi: 10.1076/jcen.23.5.599.1243 11778637

53. Kerkhoff G. Spatial hemineglect in humans. Prog Neurobiol. 2001;63(1):1–27. Epub 2000/10/21. doi: 10.1016/s0301-0082(00)00028-9 11040416.

54. Carroll D. The disability in hemiplegia caused by cerebrovascular disease: Serial studies of 98 cases. Journal of Chronic Diseases. 1962;15(2):179–88.

55. Cramer SC, Nelles G, Benson RR, Kaplan JD, Parker RA, Kwong KK, et al. A functional MRI study of subjects recovered from hemiparetic stroke. Stroke. 1997;28(12):2518–27. Epub 1997/12/31. doi: 10.1161/01.str.28.12.2518 9412643.

Článok vyšiel v časopise


2019 Číslo 12