Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

On the Perceptual/Motor Dissociation: A Review of Concepts, Theory, Experimental Paradigms and Data Interpretations

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Seeing and Perceiving
For more content, see Multisensory Research and Spatial Vision.

With its roots in Ungerleider and Mishkin's (1982) uncovering of two distinct — ventral and dorsal — anatomical pathways for the processing of visual information, and boosted by Goodale and Milner's (1992; Milner and Goodale, 1995) behavioral study of patients with lesions of either of these pathways, the perception–action dissociation became a standard reference in the sensorimotor literature. Here we present briefly the anatomical, neuropsychological and, more extensively, the psychophysical evidence favoring such dissociation and pit it against counteracting evidence as well as against potential methodological and conceptual pitfalls. We also discuss classes of models accounting for a number of 'dissociation' results and conclude that the most general and parsimonious one posits the existence of one single processing stream that accumulates information up to a decision criterion modulated by stimulation conditions, response mode (motor vs. verbal/perceptual), task constraints (speeded vs. free time responses) and the nature of the task (detection, discrimination, temporal order judgment, etc.). The reviewed evidence is not meant to refute or validate the hypothesis of a perceptual–motor dissociation. Rather, its main objective is to show that, beyond its self-evidence, such dissociation is difficult if not impossible to test.

Affiliations: 1: Laboratoire Psychologie de la Perception, Paris Descartes University and CNRS 45 rue des Saints Pères, 75006 Paris, France


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    Seeing and Perceiving — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation