Abstract
The impression of animacy from the motion of simple shapes typically relies on synthetically defined motion patterns resulting in pseudorepresentations of human movement. Thus, it is unclear how these synthetic motions relate to actual biological agents. To clarify this relationship, we introduce a novel approach that uses video processing to reduce full-video displays of human interactions to animacy displays, thus creating animate shapes whose motions are directly derived from human actions. Furthermore, this technique facilitates the comparison of interactions in animacy displays from different viewpoints—an area that has yet to be researched. We introduce two experiments in which animacy displays were created showing six dyadic interactions from two viewpoints, incorporating cues altering the quantity of the visual information available. With a six-alternative forced choice task, results indicate that animacy displays can be created via this naturalistic technique and reveal a previously unreported advantage for viewing intentional motion from an overhead viewpoint.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barrett, H. C., Todd, P. M., Miller, G. F., & Blythe, P. W. (2005). Accurate judgments of intention from motion cues alone: A crosscultural study. Evolution & Human Behavior, 26, 313–331.
Bassili, J. N. (1976). Temporal and spatial contingencies in the perception of social events. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 33, 680–685.
Blakemore, S.-J., Boyer, P., Pachot-Clouard, M., Meltzoff, A., Segebarth, C., & Decety, J. (2003). The detection of contingency and animacy from simple animations in the human brain. Cerebral Cortex, 13, 837–844.
Bloom, P., & Veres, C. (1999). The perceived intentionality of groups. Cognition, 71, B1-B9.
Blythe, P. W., Todd, P. M., & Miller, G. F. (1999). How motion reveals intention: Categorizing social interactions. In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd, & the ABC Research Group (Eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 257–285). New York: Oxford University Press.
Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436.
Camurri, A., De Poli, G., Leman, M., & Volpe, G. (2001). A multilayered conceptual framework for expressive gesture applications. In Proceedings of the International MOSART Workshop on Current Directions in Computer Music (pp. 29–34). Barcelona: Pompeu Fabra University, Audiovisual Institute.
Camurri, A., Krumhansl, C. L., Mazzarino, B., & Volpe, G. (2004). An exploratory study of anticipating human movement in dance. In Proceed ings of the 2nd International Symposium on Measurement, Analysis and Modeling of Human Functions (pp. 57–60). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.
Camurri, A., Lagerlöf, I., & Volpe, G. (2003). Recognizing emotion from dance movement: Comparison of spectator recognition and automated techniques. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59, 213–225.
Camurri, A., Mazzarino, B., & Volpe, G. (2004). Analysis of expressive gestures: The EyesWeb expressive gesture processing library. In A. Camurri & G. Volpe (Eds.), Gesture-based communication in human-computer interaction (pp. 460–467). Berlin: Springer.
Camurri, A., Mazzarino, B., Volpe, G., Morasso, P., Priano, F., & Re, C. (2003). Application of multimedia techniques in the physical rehabilitation of Parkinson’s patients. Journal of Visualization & Computer Animation, 14, 269–278.
Camurri, A., Trocca, R., & Volpe, G. (2002). Interactive systems design: A KANSEI-based approach. In Proceedings of the 2002 Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 155–162). Limerick, Ireland: University of Limerick, Department of Computer Science and Information Systems.
Castelli, F., Frith, C., Happé, F., & Frith, U. (2002). Autism, Asperger syndrome and brain mechanisms for the attribution of mental states to animated shapes. Brain, 125, 1839–1849.
Csibra, G., Gergely, G., Bíró, S., Koós, O., & Brockbank, M. (1999). Goal attribution without agency cues: The perception of “pure reason” in infancy. Cognition, 72, 237–267.
Gelman, R., Durgin, F., & Kaufman, L. (1995). Distinguishing between animates and inanimates: Not by motion alone. In D. Sperber, D. Premack, & A. J. Premack (Eds.), Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate (pp. 150–184). Oxford: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press.
Gergely, G., Nádasdy, Z., Csibra, G., & Bíró, S. (1995). Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age. Cognition, 56, 165–193.
Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944). An experimental study of apparent behavior. American Journal of Psychology, 57, 243–259.
Kuhlmeier, V., Wynn, K., & Bloom, P. (2003). Attribution of dispositional states by 12-month-olds. Psychological Science, 14, 402–408.
McAleer, P., Mazzarino, B., Volpe, G., Camurri, A., Smith, K., Paterson, S., & Pollick, F. E. (2004). Perceiving animacy and arousal in transformed displays of human interaction. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Measurement, Analysis and Modeling of Human Functions (pp. 67–71). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.
Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437–442.
Scholl, B. J., & Tremoulet, P. D. (2000). Perceptual causality and animacy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 299–309.
Szego, P. A., & Rutherford, M. D. (2007). Actual and illusory differences in constant speed influence the perception of animacy similarly. Journal of Vision, 7(12): 5, 1–7.
Timmers, R., Marolt, M., Camurri, A., & Volpe, G. (2006). Listeners’ emotional engagement with performances of a Skriabin etude: An explorative case. Psychology of Music, 34, 481–510.
Tremoulet, P. D., & Feldman, J. (2000). Perception of animacy from the motion of a single object. Perception, 29, 943–951.
Watson, A. B., & Hu, J. (1999). ShowTime: A QuickTime-based infrastructure for vision research displays. Perception, 28(Suppl.), 45.
Zacks, J. M. (2004). Using movement and intentions to understand simple events. Cognitive Science, 28, 979–1008.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This work was sponsored by EPSRC Grant GR/P02899/01.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McAleer, P., Pollick, F.E. Understanding intention from minimal displays of human activity. Behavior Research Methods 40, 830–839 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.830
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.830