Perception &: Psychophysics 1979, Vol. 25 (2},126-132 An examination of the relationship between visual capture and prism adaptation ROBERT B. WELCH University ofKansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045 and MEL H. WIDAWSKI, JANICE HARRINGTON, and DAVID H. WARREN University ofCalifornia, Riverside, Riverside, California 92502 The phenomena of prismatically induced "visual capture" and adaptation of the hand were compared. In Experiment I, it was demonstrated that when the subject's hand was transported for him by the experimenter (passive movement) immediately preceding the measure of visual capture, the magnitude of the immediate shift in felt limb position (visual capture) was enhanced relative to when the subject moved the hand himself (active movement). In Experi­ ment 2, where the dependent measure was adaptation of the prism-exposed hand, the opposite effect was produced by the active/passive manipulation. It appears, then, that different processes operate to produce visual capture and adaptation. It was speculated that visual capture represents an immediate weighting of visual over proprioceptive input as a result of the greater precision of vision and/or the subject's tendency to direct his attention more heavily to this modality. In contrast, prism adaptation is probably a recalibration of felt limb position in the direction of vision, induced by the presence of a registered discordance between visual and proprioceptive inputs. Since the pioneering studies of Helmholtz (1925, Pick, & Ikeda, 1965; Tastevin, 1937).2 When the pp. 246-247) and Stratton (1896, 1897a, 1897b), subect closes his eyes, the change in felt limb position it has generally been agreed that much can be learned dissipates very rapidly, perhaps in a few seconds about perception and perceptual-motor coordination (Hay et aI., 1965). Thus, two distinguishing char­ by noting the response of human subjects to optically acteristics of visual capture are that (I) it attains its induced visual distortion. (See Kornheiser, 1976, and greatest strength immediately after the limb is first Welch, 1974, 1978, for reviews of the extensive seen through the prism and (2) it disappears several literature in this area.) The most commonly used seconds after vision is precluded. visual rearrangement is 110 lateral displacement, Two explanations for the phenomenon of visual effected by a 20-diopter wedge prism. Viewing the capture have been offered. The first of these is that stationary hand through this device results in a dis­ vision is given greater weight than the limb-position crepancy between visual and proprioceptive stimuli, sense because vision is much more precise (i.e., less an intersensory discordance which, however, under­ variable in its accuracy from moment to moment). goes an immediate and nearly complete perceptual This may be referred to as the modality precision resolution in favor of vision. In short, the hand hypothesis. The second (although not necessarily instantly feels as if it is located near its displaced mutually exclusive) proposal is that visual capture optical position. Thus, in some manner, the subject, results from the fact that visual inputs are typically when confronted with conflicting inputs from eye more salient than proprioceptive-kinesthetic inputs, and hand, weights the former much more heavily or at least more closely attended (e.g., Canon, 1970, in his ultimate localization of the limb. This relative 1971). This has been termed the directed-attention dominance of vision over the sense of felt limb hypothesis. With respect to the latter hypothesis, position' is referred to as "visual capture" (Hay, Posner, Nissen, and Klein (1976) have argued con­ vincingly that vision is actually less automatically This investigation was carried out at the University of California, attention-eliciting (i.e., salient) than are the other Riverside, while the senior author was on sabbatical leave of spatial .modalities and that it is because of this absence from the University of Kansas. Portions of this research deficiency that human subjects are predisposed to were presented at the meeting of the Psychonomic Society. pay special attention to visual inputs. Thus, it does Denver, November 1975. Requests for reprints should be sent to Robert B. Welch, Department of Psychology," University of not appear to be the case that the relative precision Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045. Janice Harrington is now at of the various spatial sensory modalities is perfectly the University of Michigan. correlated with their relative salience, although it Copyright © 1979 Psychonomic Society, Inc. 126 0031-5117/79/020126-07$00.95/0 VISUAL CAPTUREAND PRISM ADAPTATION 127 is possible that the more precise the modality, the (1958), who found that viewing the actively swinging, more attention is directed by the observer toward prismatically displaced hand led to significant adap­ it. In short, the potential relationship between the tation, whereas exposure to the same form of limb precision, salience, and degree of directed attention movement effected by external means failed to characteristic of the various sensory modalities, as produce any adaptation at all. Although no previous well as the implications of this relationship for visual experiment has directly examined the active/passive capture, remains unclear. manipulation as it might affect visual capture, there Visual capture is elicited in situations in which is some suggestive cross-experiment evidence. In the subject views momentarily his prismatically dis­ most of the early work on visual capture (e.g., Hay placed and stationary hand. If, instead, he is allowed et aI., 1965; Pick, Warren, & Hay, 1969) the subject's to observe the limb through the prism for a more to-be-exposed limb was placed into position by the extended period while moving it about, the resulting experimenter (immediately prior to prism exposure). change in its felt position is imbued with increased This form of passive exposure led to very significant longevity and is referred to as prism adaptation. visual capture (as much as 80070 of the theoretical Choe and Welch (1974), for example, obtained a maximum). However, in a later experiment by prism-induced position sense shift which persisted Warren and Cleaves (1971), the "target" hand was for at least 25 min after the prisms were removed. actively placed into position by the subject before Naturally, the subject was not allowed to see his hand its exposure and the visual capture obtained (with during the postexposure period. Direct evidence for 10° displacement) amounted to less than 40°. Thus, this more enduring recalibration of felt limb position although there were a number of other differences is seen in the fact that after removal of the prisms between the Warren and Cleaves experiment and the subject, with eyes closed, will misplace his previous investigations of visual capture, it is previously prism-exposed hand when attempting to suggested that active limb movement may actually point straight ahead of his nose (e.g., Harris, 1963). retard capture, just the opposite of its effect on A number of investigators (e.g., Hamilton, 1964; prism adaptation. If verified, this finding would Harris, 1965) have concluded that this shift in felt support the existence of different underlying processes limb-position sense is the primary basis for both the for the two perceptual events. It might be proposed, prism-adaptive eye-hand correction that occurs for example, that visual capture represents a tendency during prism exposure and the initial misreaching for vision to be weighted heavily over felt limb after removing the prism (the "negative aftereffect"). position because, typically, the latter is much less Other forms of prism exposure may produce shifts precise, salient, or attended. In contrast, adaptation in apparent visual direction, generally considered to may be a semipermanent recalibration of felt limb be the result of changes in felt position of the position which requires for its activation the more eyes or head (e.g., Craske, 1967; Harris, 1965). marked discordance between visual and limb position However, such "visual" prism adaptation is not inputs that results when limb movement is actively the concern of the present paper. instigated. Indeed, Paillard and Brouchon (1968) Because both visual capture and visuomotor prism demonstrated that when the limb is moved actively, adaptation are induced by prismatic exposure of the its felt position is more precise (and perhaps more hand and result in a shift in the felt position of this intensely attended as well) than when it is moved limb, it is not surprising that some investigators passively. Therefore, it might be argued that active (e.g., Hay et al., 1965; Kelso, Cook, Olson, & limb movement, by its effect on felt limb position, Epstein, 1975) have assumed or implied that the causes an increase in the registered discordance underlying processes are similar or identical. However, between felt and seen limb, thereby decreasing the there are some differences between the two phe­ dominance of vision (visual capture) and increasing nornena that should be considered before accepting adaptation. It was the aim of the present inves­ this conclusion. First, while visual capture reaches tigation to test this hypothesis. full strength as soon as the observer is allowed to Two experiments were conducted. In the first, see his prismatically displaced limb, adaptation visual capture was measured under conditions of is acquired much more gradually, not reaching its either active or passive limb movement. The second maximum level until after 15-20 min of exposure experiment represented a within-subject verification under some conditions (e.g., Efstathiou, 1969). that the active/passive manipulation used here had Second, visual capture declines to zero in a matter the traditional effect on visuomotor prism adap­ of seconds, whereas prism adaptation persists for an tation. extended period of time after the hand has been hidden from view (e.g., Choe & Welch, 1974). EXPERIMENT 1 An important characteristic of prism adaptation Method is that, for its production, it requires, or is greatly Subjects.