The contribution of stereo vision to one-handed catching

Participants with normal (StereoN) and weak (StereoW) stereopsis caught tennis balls under monocular and binocular viewing at three different speed conditions. Monocular or binocular viewing did not affect catching performance in catchers with weak stereopsis, while the StereoN group caught more balls under binocular vision as compared with the monocular condition. These effects were more pronounced with increasing ball speed. Kinematic analysis of the catch partially corroborated these findings. These results indicate that StereoW catchers have not developed a compensatory strategy for information pick-up, and that negative effects of a lack of stereopsis grow larger as temporal constraints become more severe. These findings also support the notion that several monocular and/or binocular information sources can be used in the control of interceptive action.

[1]  G. Savelsbergh,et al.  Timing a one-handed catch. II. Adaptation to telestereoscopic viewing. , 1999, Experimental brain research.

[2]  F. C. Bakker,et al.  Catching balls: how to get the hand to the right place at the right time. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  M. Lenoir,et al.  Ecological Relevance of Stereopsis in One-Handed Ball-Catching , 1999, Perceptual and motor skills.

[4]  D Regan,et al.  Accuracy of estimating time to collision using binocular and monocular information , 1998, Vision Research.

[5]  M. Laurent,et al.  The effects of environmental changes on one-handed catching. , 1994, Journal of motor behavior.

[6]  Keith Davids,et al.  Discriminating the role of binocular information in the timing of a one-handed catch , 2000, Experimental Brain Research.

[7]  H. Heuer,et al.  Estimates of Time to Contact Based on Changing Size and Changing Target Vergence , 1993, Perception.

[8]  A. M. Burden,et al.  The role of predictive visual temporal information in the coordination of muscle activity in catching , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[9]  Alain Durey,et al.  Binocular Invariants in Interceptive Tasks: A Directed Perception Approach , 1996 .

[10]  G. J. K. Alderson,et al.  An operational analysis of a one-handed catching task using high speed photography. , 1974, Journal of motor behavior.

[11]  S. Bennett,et al.  The effect of temporal and informational constraints on one-handed catching performance. , 1999, Research quarterly for exercise and sport.

[12]  M. Cynader,et al.  Neurones in cat parastriate cortex sensitive to the direction of motion in three‐dimensional space , 1978, The Journal of physiology.

[13]  Simon K. Rushton,et al.  Weighted combination of size and disparity: a computational model for timing a ball catch , 1999, Nature Neuroscience.

[14]  H. Davson.  Visual Perception: Introduction , 1990 .

[15]  S Bennett,et al.  Timing a one-handed catch. I. Effects of telestereoscopic viewing. , 1999, Experimental brain research.

[16]  H Collewijn,et al.  Binocular eye movements and the perception of depth. , 1990, Reviews of oculomotor research.

[17]  G. J. Savelsbergh,et al.  Grasping tau. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  M. Goodale,et al.  The visual brain in action , 1995 .

[19]  Judge Sj,et al.  Adaptation to telestereoscopic viewing measured by one-handed ball-catching performance. , 1988 .

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

[21]  D. S. Young,et al.  How do somersaulters land on their feet? , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  Jeroen B. J. Smeets,et al.  Multiple information sources in interceptive timing , 1997 .

[23]  R. Patterson,et al.  Human Stereopsis , 1992, Human factors.

[24]  M. Cynader,et al.  Neurons in cat visual cortex tuned to the direction of motion in depth: effect of stimulus speed. , 1982, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[25]  G. Montagne,et al.  The control and coordination of one-handed catching: the effect of temporal constraints , 1994, Experimental Brain Research.

[26]  D. N. Lee,et al.  Aerial docking by hummingbirds , 1991, Naturwissenschaften.

[27]  M. Moseley,et al.  Does stereopsis matter in humans? , 1996, Eye.

[28]  G J Savelsbergh,et al.  The acquisition of catching under monocular and binocular conditions. , 1992, Journal of motor behavior.

[29]  D. Regan,et al.  Binocular and monocular stimuli for motion in depth: Changing-disparity and changing-size feed the same motion-in-depth stage , 1979, Vision Research.

[30]  R K Jones,et al.  Why two eyes are better than one: the two views of binocular vision. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[31]  L. S. Jakobson,et al.  Time to contact and the control of manual prehension , 1997, Experimental Brain Research.

[32]  David N. Lee,et al.  A Theory of Visual Control of Braking Based on Information about Time-to-Collision , 1976, Perception.

[33]  D Regan,et al.  Visual factors in hitting and catching. , 1997, Journal of sports sciences.

[34]  R J Bootsma,et al.  Acquiring an attacking forehand drive: the effects of static and dynamic environmental conditions. , 1991, Research quarterly for exercise and sport.