Effects of Visual and Proprioceptive Motion Feedback on Human Control of Targeted Movement

This research seeks to ascertain the relative value of visual and proprioceptive motion feedback during force-based control of a non-self entity like a powered prosthesis. Accurately controlling such a device is very difficult when the operator cannot see or feel the movement that results from applied forces. As an analogy to prosthesis use, we tested the relative importance of visual and proprioceptive motion feedback during targeted force-based movement. Thirteen human subjects performed a virtual finger-pointing task in which the virtual finger's velocity was always programmed to be directly proportional to the MCP joint torque applied by the subject's right index finger. During successive repetitions of the pointing task, the system conveyed the virtual finger's motion to the user through four combinations of graphical display (vision) and finger movement (proprioception). Success rate, speed, and qualitative ease of use were recorded, and visual motion feedback was found to increase all three performance measures. Proprioceptive motion feedback significantly improved success rate and ease of use, but it yielded slower motions. The results indicate that proprioceptive motion feedback improves human control of targeted movement in both sighted and unsighted conditions, supporting the pursuit of artificial proprioception for prosthetics and underscoring the importance of motion feedback for other force-controlled human-machine systems, such as interactive virtual environments and teleoperators.

[1]  M. Björklund.  Effects of Repetitive Work on Proprioception and of Stretching on Sensory Mechanisms : Implications for Work-related Neuromuscular Disorders , 2004 .

[2]  G. Raissi,et al.  Congenital insensitivity to pain with anhidrosis: a case report. , 2003, Electromyography and clinical neurophysiology.

[3]  J. Daube,et al.  The syndrome of acute sensory neuropathy , 1990, Neurology.

[4]  W. Mendenhall,et al.  Statistics for engineering and the sciences , 1984 .

[5]  S C Jacobsen,et al.  Extended physiologic taction: design and evaluation of a proportional force feedback system. , 1989, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[6]  Hong Z. Tan,et al.  HUMAN FACTORS FOR THE DESIGN OF FORCE-REFLECTING HAPTIC INTERFACES , 1994 .

[7]  Jun Hu,et al.  Congenital insensitivity to pain with anhidrosis and progressing acro-osteolysis: a case report with 7-year follow-up. , 2006, Chinese medical journal.

[8]  W.J. Tompkins,et al.  Electrotactile and vibrotactile displays for sensory substitution systems , 1991, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[9]  Y. Matsuoka,et al.  Perceptual limits for a robotic rehabilitation environment using visual feedback distortion , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[10]  A. Kargov,et al.  Progress in the development of a multifunctional hand prosthesis , 2004, The 26th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[11]  Paolo Dario,et al.  Experimental analysis of an innovative prosthetic hand with proprioceptive sensors , 2003, 2003 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.03CH37422).

[12]  J. Kelso.  Motor control mechanisms underlying human movement reproduction. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  C Ghez,et al.  Roles of proprioceptive input in the programming of arm trajectories. , 1990, Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology.

[14]  S. A. Wallace,et al.  An empirical note on attaining a spatial target after distorting the initial conditions of movement via muscle vibration. , 1984, Journal of motor behavior.

[15]  Gabriel Robles-De-La-Torre,et al.  The importance of the sense of touch in virtual and real environments , 2006, IEEE MultiMedia.

[16]  D. Atkins,et al.  Epidemiologic Overview of Individuals with Upper-Limb Loss and Their Reported Research Priorities , 1996 .

[17]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Effects of velocity on human force control , 2005, First Joint Eurohaptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems. World Haptics Conference.

[18]  D. McCloskey.  Kinesthetic sensibility. , 1978, Physiological reviews.

[19]  S. Gandevia,et al.  Motor commands contribute to human position sense , 2006, The Journal of physiology.

[20]  S. Gandevia,et al.  Cutaneous receptors contribute to kinesthesia at the index finger, elbow, and knee. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[21]  P. Fitts.  The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. 1954. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[22]  T.A. Kuiken,et al.  Prosthetic Command Signals Following Targeted Hyper-Reinnervation Nerve Transfer Surgery , 2005, 2005 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology 27th Annual Conference.

[23]  G.S. Dhillon,et al.  Direct neural sensory feedback and control of a prosthetic arm , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[24]  Russell H. Taylor,et al.  A Steady-Hand Robotic System for Microsurgical Augmentation , 1999, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[25]  P E Patterson,et al.  Design and evaluation of a sensory feedback system that provides grasping pressure in a myoelectric hand. , 1992, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[26]  D. F. Collins,et al.  Movement illusions evoked by ensemble cutaneous input from the dorsum of the human hand. , 1996, The Journal of physiology.

[27]  P. Fitts.  The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.