Although we agree with Hommel et al. that perception and action refer to one another, we disagree that they do so via a code. Gibson (1966; 1979) attempted to frame perception-action as a field phenomenon rather than as a particle phenomenon. From such a perspective, perception and action are adjoint, mutually interacting through an information field, and codes are unnecessary.

From the perspective of ecological psychology, perception and action are not separate, linear, and mechanistic processes that refer to the immediate present. Rather, they are reciprocal and continuous and refer to the impending future. Therefore, from the perspective of ecological psychology, delays in perception and action are impossible, and delay compensation mechanisms are unnecessary.

Wynn suggests that the imposition of symmetry on stone tools is indicative of the evolutionary development of cognitive abilities of the tool makers, particularly that of creating mental images. I suggest that it is more likely indicative of the evolutionary development of the perceptual ability to detect resources for behavior of hand-held objects.

Order and pattern abound in the natural world. However, whereas the emergence of order and pattern in physical or biological systems is typically explained by means of self-organization and field dynamics, the emergence of order and pattern in psychological systems is typically explained by means of mediating endogenous entities or mechanisms . I review a self-organization and field-based approach to understanding order and patterns in a variety of physical and biological systems. I then provide a sketch of recent research that (...) has applied such an approach to understanding order and pattern in psychological phenomena . Such an approach promises to reduce the explanatory burden associated with psychological phenomena and brings explanations of such phenomena into greater congruence with natural law. 2012 APA, all rights reserved). (shrink)