TY - JOUR
T1 - Kinematics in context
T2 - Predicting other's action intentions entails the perception of affordances
AU - Alhasan, Ayeh
AU - Karin, Eyal
AU - Caruana, Nathan
AU - Cross, Emily
AU - Kaplan, David
AU - Richardson, Michael J.
PY - 2025/7
Y1 - 2025/7
N2 - Intention prediction is essential for successful social interaction, but traditional research focusing solely on movement kinematics often overlooks the array of action possibilities in natural settings. This study employs a mixed-methods approach to explore intention prediction, analysing free-text responses from participants who watched videos of an actor reaching for a cup, bottle, or spoon, each with a distinct intention. Each video included varied environmental contexts to suggest specific intentions (e.g., full cups for drinking, empty cups for clearing) or presented ambiguous contexts (e.g., half-full cups). We found that participants’ intention predictions depended on the variety of action possibilities presented by both kinematics and context. Participants tended to identify the primary action possibility of the grasped item as the intended action when both kinematics and context supported its feasibility. Predictions diversified when kinematics or context suggested that the object's primary action was less likely. Our findings suggest that while intention predictions can sometimes be inaccurate, they align with the (most functional) action possibilities (i.e., affordances) indicated by the actor's movements within a given context.
AB - Intention prediction is essential for successful social interaction, but traditional research focusing solely on movement kinematics often overlooks the array of action possibilities in natural settings. This study employs a mixed-methods approach to explore intention prediction, analysing free-text responses from participants who watched videos of an actor reaching for a cup, bottle, or spoon, each with a distinct intention. Each video included varied environmental contexts to suggest specific intentions (e.g., full cups for drinking, empty cups for clearing) or presented ambiguous contexts (e.g., half-full cups). We found that participants’ intention predictions depended on the variety of action possibilities presented by both kinematics and context. Participants tended to identify the primary action possibility of the grasped item as the intended action when both kinematics and context supported its feasibility. Predictions diversified when kinematics or context suggested that the object's primary action was less likely. Our findings suggest that while intention predictions can sometimes be inaccurate, they align with the (most functional) action possibilities (i.e., affordances) indicated by the actor's movements within a given context.
KW - Action observation
KW - Action prediction
KW - Action understanding
KW - Affordances
KW - Environmental-context
KW - Intention
KW - Intention prediction
KW - Kinematics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105000858544&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106122
DO - 10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106122
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:105000858544
SN - 0010-0277
VL - 260
JO - Cognition
JF - Cognition
M1 - 106122
ER -