Natural prehension in trials without haptic feedback but only when calibration is allowed

Reach-to-grasp (prehension) movements are normally accurate, precise and stereotypical in movement pattern. These features disappear when haptic feedback is removed in 'virtual reality' systems or when participants pantomime prehension. [Goodale, M. A., Jakobsen, L. S., Keillor, J. M. (1994). Differences in the visual control of pantomimed and natural grasping movements. Neuropsychologia, 32, 1159-1178] suggested that pantomimed reaches are unnatural in form because the ventral rather than the dorsal stream mediates them. We tested whether calibration can prevent 'unnatural' prehension. Calibration refers to the use of an error (visual and/or kinaesthetic) signal to refine performance. We asked participants to reach-and-grasp in four conditions: (A) baseline; (B) reaching-to-grasp with haptic feedback (visual open-loop prehension to a physical object); (C) no feedback (visual-open-loop prehension to an object that could be seen but not felt); (D) a random mixture of (B) and (C). A 45 degrees mirror was used to display objects without any reduction in visual quality. The normal decrements in performance were observed in condition (C) but not in the identical trials randomly embedded with feedback trials in condition (D). These findings show that participants can produce normal visual-open-loop prehension in the absence of haptic feedback when calibration is allowed. Thus, dorsal stream processing can support pantomimed reaching when calibration is allowed.

[1]  P. Juslin,et al.  Visual perception of dynamic properties: cue heuristics versus direct-perceptual competence. , 2000, Psychological review.

[2]  P. Viviani,et al.  Frames of reference and control parameters in visuomanual pointing. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  M. Mon-Williams,et al.  When two eyes are better than one in prehension: monocular viewing and end-point variance , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

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

[5]  James R. Tresilian,et al.  A simple rule of thumb for elegant prehension , 2001, Current Biology.

[6]  G P Bingham,et al.  Accommodation, occlusion, and disparity matching are used to guide reaching: a comparison of actual versus virtual environments. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  Mark Mon-Williams,et al.  Reduced fields of view are neither necessary nor sufficient for distance underestimation but reduce precision and may cause calibration problems , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[8]  C F Michaels,et al.  Stimulus-target compatibility for reaching movements. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  G P Bingham,et al.  The necessity of a perception-action approach to definite distance perception: monocular distance perception to guide reaching. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  S. Watt,et al.  Field of view affects reaching, not grasping , 2000, Experimental Brain Research.

[11]  Lynn A. Olzak,et al.  Functional Aspects of Border-Signalling Mechanisms , 1996 .

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

[13]  D. M. Jacobs,et al.  Learning to perceive the relative mass of colliding balls: The effects of ratio scaling and feedback , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  L. Jakobson,et al.  Differences in the visual control of pantomimed and natural grasping movements , 1994, Neuropsychologia.

[15]  Y. Coello,et al.  Retinal and extra-retinal contribution to position coding , 2002, Behavioural Brain Research.

[16]  G. Fullerton.  Psychology and physiology. , 1896 .

[17]  S. Lehman.  The Neural and Behavioural Organization of Goal‐Directed Movements , 1990, Neurology.

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

[19]  Y. Coello,et al.  Effect of Size and Frame of Visual Field on the Accuracy of an Aiming Movement , 1997, Perception.

[20]  G P Bingham,et al.  Distortions in definite distance and shape perception as measured by reaching without and with haptic feedback. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  Hh Bülthoff,et al.  A comparison of grasping real and virtual objects , 1996 .