Natural and remote prehension: Kinematic studies of coordination

This thesis presents three experiments to investigate the planning and control of remote prehension. Experiment 1 examined the role of visual information of the tool in planning of remote grasping. Results showed that the lack of visual feedback about the tool reduced the matching accuracy when using a grasper compared to using the hand directly. The grasper used in Experiment 1 had a movable hinge, producing two different length ratios. However, the length ratio did not affect kinematics and matching errors, suggesting that knowledge about tool properties was integrated properly into the motor commands. Kinematics of remote prehension, examined in Experiment 2, showed a longer movement time, longer deceleration phase, and wider peak aperture compared to natural prehension. Results addressed the difficulty of sensorimotor integration in guiding remote prehension. Analyses on angular movements of the upper limb showed tight couplings between joint pairs but coupling patterns were different between natural and remote prehension. The elbow angle range was significant larger in remote prehension but wrist angle range was smaller. The path variability of the reaching limb was significantly smaller in remote than natural prehension. The changes of path variability of the thumb, wrist, and elbow were associated in remote prehension but not in natural prehension. Converging result indicated that the upper limb in remote prehension has less flexibility, especially for the distal portion of the motor effector. In Experiment 3 remote prehension were performed using tongs and forceps with three grasping patterns. The grasp kinematics displayed distinctive features among the hand, tongs and forceps. However, transport did not show differences between the gongs and forceps. Results revealed that the tool had component-specific effects on the motor system; therefore, the control for remote manipulation more likely is a one-time solution, subject to the changes of task constraints and tool properties. This thesis emphasizes the unique aspect in sensorimotor integration of remote prehension and dissects the influence of the tool properties and the hand-tool interactions on the planning and control of remote manipulation. Results provide insights into the design of optimal tools and work environments for remote manipulation.

[1]  H. Whiting,et al.  Motor development in children : aspects of coordination and control , 1986 .

[2]  Robert Sessions Woodworth,et al.  THE ACCURACY OF VOLUNTARY MOVEMENT , 1899 .

[3]  C. Spence,et al.  Attention and the crossmodal construction of space , 1998, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  D. Elliott,et al.  Asymmetries in the Preparation and Control of Manual Aiming Movements , 1993 .

[5]  M. Jeannerod,et al.  Selective perturbation of visual input during prehension movements , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[6]  J. Napier.  The prehensile movements of the human hand. , 1956, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[7]  Alfred Cuschieri,et al.  Influence of Two-dimensional and Three-dimensional Imaging on Endoscopic Bowel Suturing , 2000, World Journal of Surgery.

[8]  H. Head.  Aphasia and kindred disorders of speech , 1926 .

[9]  A. Wing,et al.  The Contribution of the Thumb to Reaching Movements , 1983, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[10]  K. J. Cole,et al.  Control of multimovement coordination: sensorimotor mechanisms in speech motor programming. , 1984, Journal of motor behavior.

[11]  J. F. Soechting,et al.  Coordination of arm movements in three-dimensional space. Sensorimotor mapping during drawing movement , 1986, Neuroscience.

[12]  C. Bertram,et al.  Motor control in compound movements involving prehension , 2002 .

[13]  Karl M. Newell,et al.  The acquisition of coordination: Preliminary analysis of learning to write , 1989 .

[14]  A. Gallagher,et al.  An ergonomic analysis of the fulcrum effect in the acquisition of endoscopic skills. , 1998, Endoscopy.

[15]  F. Huddle.  Coordination , 1966, Open Knowledge Institutions.

[16]  A. Cuschieri,et al.  Influence of direction of view, target‐to‐endoscope distance and manipulation angle on endoscopic knot tying , 1997, The British journal of surgery.

[17]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Cortical mechanism for the visual guidance of hand grasping movements in the monkey: A reversible inactivation study. , 2001, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[18]  Christine L. MacKenzie,et al.  Functional relationships between grasp and transport components in a prehension task , 1990 .

[19]  A. Wing,et al.  Grasp size and accuracy of approach in reaching. , 1986, Journal of motor behavior.

[20]  A. Cuschieri.  Visual Displays and Visual Perception in Minimal Access Surgery , 1995, Seminars in laparoscopic surgery.

[21]  A. Cuschieri,et al.  Task performance in endoscopic surgery is influenced by location of the image display. , 1998, Annals of surgery.

[22]  David N. Lee,et al.  Visual proprioceptive control of standing in human infants , 1974 .

[23]  N. A. Bernshteĭn,et al.  Human motor actions : Bernstein reassessed , 1984 .

[24]  Atsushi Iriki,et al.  Self-images in the video monitor coded by monkey intraparietal neurons , 2001, Neuroscience Research.

[25]  M. Jeannerod.  Mechanisms of visuomotor coordination: A study in normal and brain-damaged subjects , 1986, Neuropsychologia.

[26]  J. Abbs,et al.  Labial-Mandibular Coordination in the Production of Speech: Implications for the Operation of Motor Equivalence , 1976, Phonetica.

[27]  Warren D. Smith,et al.  Ergonomic problems associated with laparoscopic surgery , 1999, Surgical Endoscopy.

[28]  R G Marteniuk,et al.  Evidence of motor equivalence in a pointing task involving locomotion. , 2000, Motor Control.

[29]  M. Jeannerod,et al.  Orienting the finger opposition space during prehension movements. , 1994, Journal of motor behavior.

[30]  B. Steenbergen,et al.  Achieving Coordination in Prehension: Joint Freezing and Postural Contributions. , 1995, Journal of motor behavior.

[31]  C. Gross,et al.  The representation of extrapersonal space: A possible role for bimodal, visual-tactile neurons , 1995 .

[32]  C. MacKenzie,et al.  Three-Dimensional Movement Trajectories in Fitts' Task: Implications for Control , 1987 .

[33]  Karl M. Newell,et al.  Constraints on the Development of Coordination , 1986 .

[34]  J. Landsmeer.  Power Grip and Precision Handling , 1962, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[35]  Umberto Castiello,et al.  Does the type of prehension influence the kinematics of reaching , 1992, Behavioural Brain Research.

[36]  B. Stein,et al.  The Merging of the Senses , 1993 .

[37]  B Hopkins,et al.  The coordination of two-effector actions: spoon-feeding and intermanual prehension. , 1999, British journal of psychology.

[38]  M. Jeannerod.  The timing of natural prehension movements. , 1984, Journal of motor behavior.

[39]  Romeo Chua,et al.  Perceptual-Motor Interaction: Some Implications For Hci , 2007 .

[40]  D. Elliott,et al.  Manual asymmetries in visually directed aiming. , 1986, Canadian journal of psychology.

[41]  K. Connolly,et al.  The Emergence of a Tool-Using Skill in Infancy. , 1989 .

[42]  C. Spence,et al.  Multisensory perception: Beyond modularity and convergence , 2000, Current Biology.

[43]  E. Menzel.  Animal Tool Behavior: The Use and Manufacture of Tools by Animals, Benjamin B. Beck. Garland STPM Press, New York and London (1980), 306, Price £24.50 , 1981 .

[44]  N. A. Bernshteĭn.  The co-ordination and regulation of movements , 1967 .

[45]  R. C. Oldfield.  The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. , 1971, Neuropsychologia.

[46]  B. Beck.  Animal Tool Behavior: The Use and Manufacture of Tools by Animals , 1980 .

[47]  J. T. Massey,et al.  Spatial trajectories and reaction times of aimed movements: effects of practice, uncertainty, and change in target location. , 1981, Journal of neurophysiology.

[48]  C G Cao,et al.  Gaze patterns in laparoscopic surgery. , 1999, Studies in health technology and informatics.

[49]  G. Holmes,et al.  Sensory disturbances from cerebral lesions , 1911 .

[50]  R. Marteniuk.  Information processing in motor skills , 1976 .

[51]  J. Soechting.  Elements of Coordinated ARM Movements in Three-Dimensional Space§ , 1989 .

[52]  M. Jeannerod,et al.  Constraints on human arm movement trajectories. , 1987, Canadian journal of psychology.

[53]  Jon Driver,et al.  Active Tool Use with the Contralesional Hand Can Reduce Cross-modal Extinction of Touch on that Hand , 2002, Neurocase.

[54]  Maurizio Gentilucci,et al.  Grasping an object naturally or with a tool: are these tasks guided by a common motor representation? , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[55]  C. Spence,et al.  Tool-use changes multimodal spatial interactions between vision and touch in normal humans , 2002, Cognition.

[56]  P. Fitts,et al.  S-R compatibility: spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[57]  R. Marteniuk,et al.  Contributions of gait and trunk movements to prehension: perspectives from world- and body-centered coordinates. , 2001, Motor control.

[58]  J C Rothwell,et al.  Manual motor performance in a deafferented man. , 1982, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[59]  R. L. Deininger,et al.  S-R compatibility: correspondence among paired elements within stimulus and response codes. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[60]  C. Atkeson,et al.  Kinematic features of unrestrained vertical arm movements , 1985, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[61]  Gordon M. Redding,et al.  Chapter 5 Adaptive Eye-Hand Coordination: Implications of Prism Adaptation for Perceptual-Motor Organization , 1992 .

[62]  C. MacKenzie,et al.  Integration of visual information and motor output in reaching and grasping: The contributions of peripheral and central vision , 1990, Neuropsychologia.

[63]  Richard G. Carson,et al.  Spoon handling in two- to four year old children , 1997 .

[64]  E. Taub.  Movement In Nonhuman Primates Deprived Of Somatosensory Feedback , 1976, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[65]  Lawrence W. Stark,et al.  Sensing and Manipulation Problems in Endoscopic Surgery: Experiment, Analysis, and Observation , 1993, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[66]  S. Tipper,et al.  Vision influences tactile perception without proprioceptive orienting , 1998, Neuroreport.

[67]  M A Arbib,et al.  Schemas for the temporal organization of behaviour. , 1985, Human neurobiology.

[68]  B. Zheng,et al.  Reaction times and the decision-making process in endoscopic surgery , 2002, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[69]  M. Tanaka,et al.  Coding of modified body schema during tool use by macaque postcentral neurones. , 1996, Neuroreport.

[70]  M. A. Arbib,et al.  Models of Trajectory Formation and Temporal Interaction of Reach and Grasp. , 1993, Journal of motor behavior.

[71]  C. Spence,et al.  Multisensory integration and the body schema: close to hand and within reach , 2003, Current Biology.

[72]  C. Spence,et al.  Cross-modal links in spatial attention. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[73]  M. Jeannerod.  Intersegmental coordination during reaching at natural visual objects , 1981 .

[74]  Breedveld Wentink,et al.  Eye-hand coordination in laparoscopy - an overview of experiments and supporting aids , 2001, Minimally invasive therapy & allied technologies : MITAT : official journal of the Society for Minimally Invasive Therapy.

[75]  C. Spence,et al.  Seeing Your Own Touched Hands in a Mirror Modulates Cross-Modal Interactions , 2002, Psychological science.

[76]  Frank Marchak,et al.  Constraints for Action Selection: Overhand Versus Underhand Grips , 2018, Attention and Performance XIII.

[77]  R. Schmidt.  A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. , 1975 .

[78]  K. J. Cole,et al.  Coordination of three-joint digit movements for rapid finger-thumb grasp. , 1986, Journal of neurophysiology.

[79]  B. Vereijken,et al.  Free(z)ing Degrees of Freedom in Skill Acquisition , 1992 .

[80]  R. Emmerik,et al.  The effects of practice on limb kinematics in a throwing task. , 1989, Journal of motor behavior.

[81]  S. Tipper,et al.  Vision influences tactile perception at body sites that cannot be viewed directly , 2001, Experimental Brain Research.