Search

In grasping studies, maximum grip aperture (MGA) is commonly used as an indicator of the object size representation within the visuomotor system. However, a number of additional factors, such as movement safety, comfort, and efficiency, might affect the scaling of MGA with object size and potentially mask perceptual effects on actions. While unimanual grasping has been investigated for a wide range of object sizes, so far very small objects (<5 mm) have not been included. Investigating grasping of these tiny objects is particularly interesting because it allows us to evaluate the three most prominent explanatory accounts of grasping (the perception-action model, the digits-in-space hypothesis, and the biomechanical account) by comparing the predictions that they make for these small objects. In the first experiment, participants ( N = 26 ) grasped and manually estimated the height of square cuboids with heights from 0.5 to 5 mm. In the second experiment, a different sample of participants ( N = 24 ) performed the same tasks with square cuboids with heights from 5 to 20 mm. We determined MGAs, manual estimation apertures (MEA), and the corresponding just-noticeable differences (JND). In both experiments, MEAs scaled with object height and adhered to Weber's law. MGAs for grasping scaled with object height in the second experiment but not consistently in the first experiment. JNDs for grasping never scaled with object height. We argue that the digits-in-space hypothesis provides the most plausible account of the data. Furthermore, the findings highlight that the reliability of MGA as an indicator of object size is strongly task-dependent., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

In their Perception-Action Model (PAM), Goodale and Milner (1992) proposed functionally independent and encapsulated processing of visual information for action and perception. In this context, they postulated that visual input for action is processed in an automatized and analytic manner, which renders visuomotor behaviour immune to perceptual interferences or multitasking costs due to sharing of cognitive resources. Here, we investigate the well-known Garner Interference effect under dual- and single-task conditions in its classic perceptual form as well as in grasping. Garner Interference arises when stimuli are classified along a relevant dimension (e.g., their length), while another irrelevant dimension (e.g., their width) has to be ignored. In the present study, participants were presented with differently sized rectangular objects and either grasped them or classified them as long or short via button presses. We found classical Garner Interference effects in perception as expressed in prolonged reaction times when variations occurred also in the irrelevant object dimension. While reaction times during grasping were not susceptible to Garner Interference, effects were observed in a number of measures that reflect grasping accuracy (i.e., poorer adjustment of grip aperture to object size, prolonged adjustment times, and increased variability of the maximum hand opening when irrelevant object dimensions were varied). In addition, multitasking costs occurred in both perception and action tasks. Thus, our findings challenge the assumption of automaticity in visuomotor behaviour as proposed by the PAM.

Many experiments have examined how the visual information used for action control is represented in our brain, and whether or not visually-guided and memory-guided hand movements rely on dissociable visual representations that are processed in different brain areas (dorsal vs. ventral). However, little is known about how these representations decay over longer time periods and whether or not different visual properties are retained in a similar fashion. In three experiments we investigated how information about object size and object position affect grasping as visual memory demands increase. We found that position information decayed rapidly with increasing delays between viewing the object and initiating subsequent actions - impacting both the accuracy of the transport component (lower end-point accuracy) and the grasp component (larger grip apertures) of the movement. In contrast, grip apertures and fingertip forces remained well-adjusted to target size in conditions in which positional information was either irrelevant or provided, regardless of delay, indicating that object size is encoded in a more stable manner than object position. The findings provide evidence that different grasp-relevant properties are encoded differently by the visual system. Furthermore, we argue that caution is required when making inferences about object size representations based on alterations in the grip component as these variations are confounded with the accuracy with which object position is represented. Instead fingertip forces seem to provide a reliable and confound-free measure to assess internal size estimations in conditions of increased visual uncertainty., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In this study we investigated whether motor and perceptual tasks share common attentional resources. To this end, we used a dual-task paradigm requiring participants to perform grasping movements toward objects of varying size and at the same time to identify a perceptual target presented at the object's location. To ensure that both tasks were performed simultaneously and to prevent participants from adopting a sequential strategy, the perceptual target was always presented after movement onset and could occur at two different moments in time (early vs. late). Our findings show that both, the planning and the control of the movement were altered in the dual-task condition, resulting in prolonged reaction times and delayed adjustment of the grip to object size. Also, the perceptual performance was impaired when both tasks were performed concurrently. These findings are in contrast with previous studies suggesting that only movement planning but not movement control are susceptible to dual-task interferences (Enns & Liu, 2009, chap. 12). Instead, our results give further evidence for the proposition that the dorsal (visuomotor) and ventral (perceptual) stream share the same attentional resources and that attention is required for effective grasping., (2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved)

We investigated the choice of contact points during multidigit grasping of different objects. In Experiment 1, cylinders were grasped and lifted. Participants were either instructed as to the number of fingers they should use, ranging from a two-finger grasp to a five-finger grasp, or could grasp with their preferred number of fingers. We found a strong relationship between the position of the fingertips on the object and the number of fingers used. In general, variability in the choice of contact points was low within- as well as between participants. The virtual finger, defined as the geometric mean position of fingers opposing the thumb, was in almost perfect opposition to the thumb, suggesting the formation of a functional unit using all contributing fingers in the grasp. In Experiment 2, four more complex shapes (rectangle, hexagon, pentagon, curved object) were grasped. Although we found some moderate between-participant variability in the choice of contact points, the within-participant variability was again remarkably low. In both experiments, participants showed a strong preference to use four or five fingers during grasping when left with free choice. Taken together, our findings suggest a preplanning of the grasping movement and that grasping results from a coordinated interplay between the fingers contributing to the grasp that cannot be understood as independent digit movements.

It has been observed that grip opening is delayed when participants are asked to execute complex grasping movements, such as passing over an obstacle or a via-position (Haggard and Wing 1998; Alberts et al. 2002). This finding was proposed to indicate a shift toward sequential performance, meaning that complex movements are carried out in independent motor steps. In our experiments we investigated which aspects of a grasping task determine whether a movement is executed holistically or sequentially. Therefore, participants had to perform different types of curved movements in order to reach and grasp a target object. When only the complexity of the transport paths was varied, no indication of sequential movement execution was found. However, when participants additionally had to either stop at, or pass over a certain via-position the pre-shaping pattern changed considerably indicating a movement segmentation effect. This effect became stronger with increasing difficulty of the sub-task, suggesting that attentional factors are involved.

It was proposed that grasping is a relatively stereotyped movement pattern which can be subdivided into the components of manipulation, transport, and orientation of the hand. However, it is still a matter of debate whether these components are independent of each other. In three experiments we altered the start posture of the hand by either changing the size of the start aperture or the orientation of the hand prior to movement onset. The variation of the aperture size primarily affected the manipulation component of the grip resulting in an overall change of the pre-shaping profile. In contrast, an alteration of the start orientation affected the manipulation and the transport components to a similar extent. These results give further evidence that hand orientation is neither planned nor controlled independently from the other movement components. Moreover, when the grip had to match specific object properties, adjustments were mainly achieved within the first movement part. In contrast, when there were no movement constraints the final finger positions were influenced by the initial start posture of the hand. We found no evidence for a fixed spatial or temporal coupling of the grasp and the transport component in our experiments.

The availability of visual information influences the execution of goal-directed movements. This is very prominent in memory conditions, where a delay is introduced between stimulus presentation and execution of the movement. The corresponding effects could be due to a decay of the visual information or to different processing mechanisms used for movements directed at visible (dorsal stream) and remembered (ventral stream) objects as proposed by the two visual systems hypothesis. In three experiments, the authors investigated grasping under full vision and three different delay conditions with increasing memory demands. Results indicate that the visuomotor information used for grasping decays rapidly. No evidence was found for qualitative changes in movement kinematics and the use of different representations for visually guided and memory guided movements. Findings rather suggest that delayed grasping is similar to grasping directed to larger objects under full vision. Therefore, the authors propose that grasping after a delay is guided by classic memory mechanisms and that this is reflected in an increasing maximum grip aperture in grasping.

Researchers proposed that humans may achieve grip adaptation to a new object size by reprogramming and substituting the initially planned motor program. The authors investigated corrective processes in grasping by using a size perturbation paradigm. In 3 experiments, they investigated how grip adjustments are influenced by different perturbation times (early or late), the visibility of the moving hand, and different perturbation sizes (small or large). Results indicated that individuals execute corrections faster after late perturbations. The availability of visual information about the hand had minimal effect on the corrections, suggesting that feedforward mechanisms are involved. Moreover, participants achieved adjustments mainly by smooth changes of the aperture over time, contradicting the researchers' assumption that a new movement is programmed and superimposed.

We tested whether a delay between stimulus presentation and grasping leads to a shift from dorsal to ventral control of the movement, as suggested by the perception-action theory of Milner and Goodale (Milner, A.D., & Goodale, M.A. (1995). The visual brain in action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.). In this theory the dorsal cortical stream has a short memory, such that after a few seconds the dorsal information is decayed and the action is guided by the ventral stream. Accordingly, grasping should become responsive to certain visual illusions after a delay (because only the ventral stream is assumed to be deceived by these illusions). We used the Müller-Lyer illusion, the typical illusion in this area of research, and replicated the increase of the motor illusion after a delay. However, we found that this increase is not due to memory demands but to the availability of visual feedback during movement execution which leads to online corrections of the movement. Because such online corrections are to be expected if the movement is guided by one single representation of object size, we conclude that there is no evidence for a shift from dorsal to ventral control in delayed grasping of the Müller-Lyer illusion. We also performed the first empirical test of a critique Goodale (Goodale, M.A. (2006, October 27). Visual duplicity: Action without perception in the human visual system. The XIV. Kanizsa lecture, Triest, Italy.) raised against studies finding illusion effects in grasping: Goodale argued that these studies used methods that lead to unnatural grasping which is guided by the ventral stream. Therefore, these studies might never have measured the dorsal stream, but always the ventral stream. We found clear evidence against this conjecture.