Two wrongs make a right: linear increase of accuracy of visually-guided manual pointing, reaching, and height-matching with increase in hand-to-body distance

Measurements were made of the accuracy of open-loop manual pointing and height-matching to a visual target whose elevation was perceptually mislocalized. Accuracy increased linearly with distance of the hand from the body, approaching complete accuracy at full extension; with the hand close to the body (within the midfrontal plane), the manual errors equaled the magnitude of the perceptual mislocalization. The visual inducing stimulus responsible for the perceptual errors was a single pitched-from-vertical line that was long (50 degrees), eccentrically-located (25 degrees horizontal), and viewed in otherwise total darkness. The line induced perceptual errors in the elevation of a small, circular visual target set to appear at eye level (VPEL), a setting that changed linearly with the change in the line's visual pitch as has been previously reported (pitch: -30 degrees topbackward to 30 degrees topforward); the elevation errors measured by VPEL settings varied systematically with pitch through an 18 degrees range. In a fourth experiment the visual inducing stimulus responsible for the perceptual errors was shown to induce separately-measured errors in the manual setting of the arm to feel horizontal that were also distance-dependent. The distance-dependence of the visually-induced changes in felt arm position accounts quantitatively for the distance-dependence of the manual errors in pointing/reaching and height matching to the visual target: The near equality of the changes in felt horizontal and changes in pointing/reaching with the finger at the end of the fully extended arm is responsible for the manual accuracy of the fully-extended point; with the finger in the midfrontal plane their large difference is responsible for the inaccuracies of the midfrontal-plane point. The results are inconsistent with the widely-held but controversial theory that visual spatial information employed for perception and action are dissociated and different with no illusory visual influence on action. A different two-system theory, the Proximal/Distal model, employing the same signals from vision and from the body-referenced mechanism with different weights for different hand-to-body distances, accounts for both the perceptual and the manual results in the present experiments.

[1]  R. Held.  Dissociation of visual functions by deprivation and rearrangement , 1968 .

[2]  J. Stevens,et al.  Oculoparalytic illusion: visual-field dependent spatial mislocalizations by humans partially paralyzed with curare. , 1982, Science.

[3]  R B Welch,et al.  The Role of Retinal versus Perceived Size in the Effects of Pitched Displays on Visually Perceived Eye Level , 1996, Perception.

[4]  M. Perenin,et al.  Visual function within the hemianopic field following early cerebral hemidecortication in man—I. Spatial localization , 1978, Neuropsychologia.

[5]  Geraint Rees,et al.  Consciousness lost and found , 1997 .

[6]  E. Bizzi,et al.  The Cognitive Neurosciences , 1996 .

[7]  Richard Latto,et al.  Is blindsight an effect of scattered light, spared cortex, and near-threshold vision? , 1983, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[8]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Coding of peripersonal space in inferior premotor cortex (area F4). , 1996, Journal of neurophysiology.

[9]  Wenxun Li,et al.  The time course of hand-to-body-distance dependence and memory dependence of manual pointing and height-matching accuracy to a mislocalized visual target , 2004 .

[10]  D. Carey,et al.  Do action systems resist visual illusions? , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[12]  H. A. Witkin.  Perception of body position and of the position of the visual field. , 1949 .

[13]  H. A. Witkin,et al.  Studies in space orientation; further experiments on perception of the upright with displaced visual fields. , 1948, Journal of experimental psychology.

[14]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Afferent properties of periarcuate neurons in macaque monkeys. II. Visual responses , 1981, Behavioural Brain Research.

[15]  G. Schneider,et al.  Contrasting visuomotor functions of tectum and cortex in the golden hamster , 1967, Psychologische Forschung.

[16]  Jordan Grafman,et al.  Handbook of Neuropsychology , 1991 .

[17]  L. Weiskrantz.  Blindsight : a case study and implications , 1986 .

[18]  Nicola Bruno,et al.  When does action resist visual illusions? , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[19]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Functional organization of inferior area 6 in the macaque monkey , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[20]  John H. R. Maunsell,et al.  Hierarchical organization and functional streams in the visual cortex , 1983, Trends in Neurosciences.

[21]  M M Cohen,et al.  Effect of structured visual environments on apparent eye level , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[22]  Vision Research , 1961, Nature.

[23]  T H MEIKLE,et al.  THE ROLE OF THE SUPERIOR COLLICULUS IN VISUALLY GUIDED BEHAVIOR. , 1965, Experimental neurology.

[24]  J. Danckert.  Common Mechanisms in Perception and Action: Attention and Performance XIX Wolfgang Prinz, Bernhard Hommel (Eds.), Oxford University Press, 2002, Price: £ 65.00, ISBN: 0-19-851069 , 2003, Neuropsychologia.

[25]  M. Goodale,et al.  Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand , 1995, Current Biology.

[26]  J. Mattingley,et al.  The cognitive and neural bases of spatial neglect , 2004 .

[27]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  Common Mechanisms in Perception and Action: Attention and Performance Volume Xix , 2001 .

[28]  L Weiskrantz,et al.  The Ferrier Lecture, 1989 - Outlooks for blindsight: explicit methodologies for implicit processes , 1990, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. B. Biological Sciences.

[29]  L Matin,et al.  Visually Perceived Eye Level is Influenced Identically by Lines from Erect and Pitched Planes , 1996, Perception.

[30]  G. Schneider.  Two visual systems. , 1969, Science.

[31]  V. Franz,et al.  Action does not resist visual illusions , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[32]  David Ingle,et al.  Locating and identifying: Two modes of visual processing , 1967 .

[33]  M. Goodale,et al.  Frames of Reference for Perception and Action in the Human Visual System , 1998, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[34]  L. Jakobson,et al.  A neurological dissociation between perceiving objects and grasping them , 1991, Nature.

[35]  L. Matin,et al.  Influences of visual pitch and visual yaw on visually perceived eye level (VPEL) and straight ahead (VPSA) for erect and rolled-to-horizontal observers , 2001, Vision Research.

[36]  W. Prinz.  Common mechanisms in perception and action. , 2002 .

[37]  Leslie G. Ungerleider.  Two cortical visual systems , 1982 .

[38]  C. Trevarthen,et al.  Two mechanisms of vision in primates , 1968, Psychologische Forschung.

[39]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Coding near and far space , 2002 .

[40]  L. Matin,et al.  The influence of a stationary single line in darkness on the visual perception of eye level , 1994, Vision Research.

[41]  J. Lackner,et al.  Combined influences of gravitoinertial force level and visual field pitch on visually perceived eye level. , 1997, Journal of vestibular research : equilibrium & orientation.

[42]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Space coding by premotor cortex , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[43]  M. Jeannerod.  The cognitive neuroscience of action , 1997, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[44]  J. Bullier,et al.  Anatomical segregation of two cortical visual pathways in the macaque monkey , 1990, Visual Neuroscience.

[45]  V. Mountcastle,et al.  Posterior parietal association cortex of the monkey: command functions for operations within extrapersonal space. , 1975, Journal of neurophysiology.

[46]  L Matin,et al.  Visually perceived eye level: changes induced by a pitched-from-vertical 2-line visual field. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[47]  L. Matin,et al.  Spatial summation among coextensive and parallel line segments across wide separations (50°): Egocentric localization and the Great Circle Model , 1994, Vision Research.

[48]  L Weiskrantz,et al.  Visual capacity in the hemianopic field following a restricted occipital ablation. , 1974, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[49]  C. Gross,et al.  Mapping Space With Neurons , 1994 .

[50]  D. Ingle.  Two visual mechanisms underlying the behavior of fish , 1967, Psychologische Forschung.

[51]  R. Welch,et al.  Effects of gravitational and optical stimulation on the perception of target elevation , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[52]  L. Matin,et al.  Change in Visually Perceived Eye Level without Change in Perceived Pitch , 1998, Perception.

[53]  Leonard Matin,et al.  Neural model for processing the influence of visual orientation on visually perceived eye level (VPEL) , 2001, Vision Research.

[54]  Giuseppe Vallar,et al.  The Cognitive and Neural Bases of Spatial Neglect , 2002 .

[55]  L. Matin,et al.  Multimodal basis for egocentric spatial localization and orientation. , 1995, Journal of vestibular research : equilibrium & orientation.

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

[57]  L. Matin,et al.  Averaging and summation of influences on visually perceived eye level between two long lines differing in pitch or roll-tilt , 1999, Vision Research.

[58]  Driss Boussaoud,et al.  Frontal lobe mechanisms subserving vision-for-action versus vision-for-perception , 1995, Behavioural Brain Research.

[59]  M. Gazzaniga,et al.  Residual vision in a scotoma: implications for blindsight. , 1992, Science.

[60]  C. R. Fox,et al.  Visually perceived eye level and perceived elevation of objects: Linearly additive influences from visual field pitch and from gravity , 1989, Vision Research.

[61]  R. Held,et al.  Residual Visual Function after Brain Wounds involving the Central Visual Pathways in Man , 1973, Nature.

[62]  K. F. Austen,et al.  Oculoparalytic Illusion : Visual-Field Dependent Spatial Mislocalizations by Humans Partially Paralyzed with Curare , 2006 .

[63]  Mountcastle Vb,et al.  The world around us: neural command function for selective attention. , 1976, Neurosciences Research Program bulletin.

[64]  G Rizzolatti,et al.  Functional organization of inferior area 6. , 1987, Ciba Foundation symposium.

[65]  H H Bülthoff,et al.  Can Learning One Grasp Facilitate Novel Grasps? , 1997 .

[66]  O. Grüsser,et al.  Multimodal Structure of the Extrapersonal Space , 1983 .

[67]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Functional organization of inferior area 6 in the macaque monkey , 1988, Experimental Brain Research.

[68]  Harold Bekkering,et al.  Common mechanisms in perception and action. , 2002 .

[69]  R. Mansfield,et al.  Analysis of visual behavior , 1982 .

[70]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Deficits in attention and movement following the removal of postarcuate (area 6) and prearcuate (area 8) cortex in macaque monkeys. , 1983, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[71]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  Organization of visual inputs to the inferior temporal and posterior parietal cortex in macaques , 1991, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[72]  R B Welch,et al.  Accuracy and adaptation of reaching and pointing in pitched visual environments , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.