A Methodological Note on Overestimates of Reaching Distance: Distinguishing Between Perceptual and Analytical Judgments

Abstract

Abstract Previous research has shown that perceivers tend to overestimate whether an object is within reach. This exploratory study examined the hypothesis that this overestimate is a result of transforming what is typically a perception-action process into an analytical, reflective judgment. It was hypothesized that reaching estimates would be more accurate as analytical processes became less implicated in the judgment. The results indicate that when the judgment of reach was the focal task for perceivers, they overestimated their reach; but when the judgments were made a subsidiary part of aprimary task, with perceivers judging how reachable an object was in order to carry out some other task, their estimates of perceived reach were very accurate. These results support the hypothesis and suggest that perception-action prgcesses should be conceptualized as a complex mode of functioning that can operate independently of analytical processes.