Effects of visual uncertainty on grasping movements

To successfully lift an object, a person’s fingers must be moved to locations where forces can be applied that are sufficient for maintaining contact and that allow for easy object manipulation. Obtaining such finger positions becomes more difficult when there is perceptual uncertainty about the location of the hand and object. However, knowledge about the amount of uncertainty could be incorporated into grasp plans to mitigate its effect. For example, during peripheral viewing the fingers could open wider to avoid colliding with or missing the object. The goal of this study is to determine the degree to which people incorporate their understanding of visual uncertainty when making a precision grasp. To investigate, subjects reached to a spatially fixed object whose retinal location was varied by fixating points 0–80° to the left of the object. This manipulation controlled the visual uncertainty of the hand and target without affecting the kinematic demands of the task. We found that people systematically changed their grasping behavior as a function of the amount of visual uncertainty in the task. Specifically, subjects’ maximum grip aperture increased linearly with target eccentricity. Moreover, the effect of visual uncertainty on finger trajectories could be captured by a single dimension of change along an axis. Together, these findings suggest that the sensorimotor system estimates visual uncertainty and behaviorally adjusts for it during grasping movements.

[1]  Mia Hubert,et al.  LIBRA: a MATLAB library for robust analysis , 2005 .

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

[3]  C. A. Burbeck Position and spatial frequency in large-scale localization judgments , 1987, Vision Research.

[4]  Philip N. Sabes,et al.  Modeling Sensorimotor Learning with Linear Dynamical Systems , 2006 .

[5]  M. Goodale,et al.  Peripheral vision for perception and action , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[6]  Douglas M. Hawkins,et al.  The feasible solution algorithm for least trimmed squares regression , 1994 .

[7]  V. Gullapalli,et al.  Visual Information and Object Size in the Control of Reaching. , 1996, Journal of motor behavior.

[8]  Dennis M. Levi,et al.  PII: 0042-6989(95)00264-2 , 1997 .

[9]  Daniel M. Wolpert,et al.  Signal-dependent noise determines motor planning , 1998, Nature.

[10]  Philip N. Sabes,et al.  Modeling Sensorimotor Learning with Linear Dynamical Systems , 2006, Neural Computation.

[11]  J. Douglas Crawford,et al.  Optimal transsaccadic integration explains distorted spatial perception , 2003, Nature.

[12]  M. Jeannerod,et al.  Influence of object position and size on human prehension movements , 1997, Experimental Brain Research.

[13]  D. Whitaker,et al.  Disentangling the Role of Spatial Scale, Separation and Eccentricity in Weber's Law for Position , 1997, Vision Research.

[14]  M. A. Goodale,et al.  The role of visual feedback of hand position in the control of manual prehension , 1999, Experimental Brain Research.

[15]  E. Brenner,et al.  A new view on grasping. , 1999, Motor control.

[16]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  An internal model for sensorimotor integration. , 1995, Science.

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

[18]  D. Wolpert,et al.  Controlling the statistics of action: obstacle avoidance. , 2002, Journal of neurophysiology.

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

[20]  Michael S Landy,et al.  Statistical decision theory and the selection of rapid, goal-directed movements. , 2003, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[21]  M. Landy,et al.  Optimal Compensation for Changes in Task-Relevant Movement Variability , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[22]  C. A. Burbeck,et al.  Two mechanisms for localization? Evidence for separation-dependent and separation-independent processing of position information , 1990, Vision Research.

[23]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Obstacle Avoidance and a Perturbation Sensitivity Model for Motor Planning , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[24]  Anne C. Sittig,et al.  The precision of proprioceptive position sense , 1998, Experimental Brain Research.

[25]  David C Knill,et al.  Visual Feedback Control of Hand Movements , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[26]  S. Chieffi,et al.  Coordination between the transport and the grasp components during prehension movements , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[27]  B. Bergum,et al.  Attention and performance IX , 1982 .

[28]  Eli Brenner,et al.  On the relation between object shape and grasping kinematics. , 2004, Journal of neurophysiology.

[29]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning , 2004, Nature.

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

[31]  M. Jeannerod,et al.  Selective perturbation of visual input during prehension movements , 1991, Experimental Brain Research.