Abstract
Visually recognising one’s own body is important both for controlling movement and for one’s sense of self. Twenty previous studies asked healthy adults to make rapid recognition judgements about photographs of their own and other peoples’ hands. Some of these judgements involved explicit self-recognition: “Is this your hand or another person’s?” while others assessed self-recognition implicitly, comparing performance for self and other hands in tasks unrelated to self-other discrimination (e.g., left-versus-right; match-to-sample). We report five experiments with three groups of participants performing left-versus-right (Experiment 1) and self-versus-other discrimination tasks (Experiments 2 to 5). No evidence was found for better performance with self than with other stimuli, but some evidence was found for a self-disadvantage in the explicit task. Manipulating stimulus duration as a proxy for task difficulty revealed strong response biases in the explicit self-recognition task. Rather than discriminating between self and other stimuli, participants seem to treat self-other discrimination tasks as self-detection tasks, raising their criterion and consistently responding ‘not me’ when the task is difficult. A meta-analysis of 21 studies revealed no overall self-advantage, and suggested a publication bias for reports showing self-advantages in implicit tasks. Although this may appear counter-intuitive, we suggest that there may be no self-advantage in hand recognition.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
; Spence, Charles 2 ; Rossetti, Yves 3 1 University of Nottingham, School of Psychology, Nottingham, UK (GRID:grid.4563.4) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8868)
2 University of Oxford, Department of Experimental Psychology, Oxford, UK (GRID:grid.4991.5) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8948)
3 Université de Lyon, Equipe ‘Trajectoires’, Centre de Recherche en Neurosciences de Lyon, Inserm UMR-S 1028, CNRS UMR 5292, Bron, France (GRID:grid.7849.2) (ISNI:0000 0001 2150 7757); Hospices Civils de Lyon, Plate-Forme ‘Mouvement et Handicap’, hôpital Henry Gabrielle, Saint-Genis-Laval, France (GRID:grid.413852.9) (ISNI:0000 0001 2163 3825); Hospices Civils de Lyon, Service de médecine physique et réadaptation, hôpital Henry Gabrielle, Saint-Genis Laval, France (GRID:grid.413852.9) (ISNI:0000 0001 2163 3825)





