A common first-order time-to-contact based control of hand-closure initiation in catching and grasping.

To catch or grasp an object, the initiation of hand closure has to be coordinated with the relative movement between hand and object. In search of a common control of the initiation of hand closure for both tasks (van de Kamp, Bongers, & Zaal, 2010), the authors studied two tasks, catching while keeping the hand stationary and prehension. They showed that the initiation of hand closure could well be based on first-order time-to-contact in the prehension task but not in the catching task studied. The current study tested if the fact that the hand-object gap was closed at a linear rate made that the initiation of hand closure could not be explained on the basis of that same first-order time-to-contact in the catching task. In Experiment 1, the participants had to catch targets that approached at nonlinear rates while keeping the hand stationary. In Experiment 2, the participants were free to move their hand in catching the approaching objects, allowing the closure of the hand-object gap to occur at a nonlinear rate as it would in natural movements. The results showed that the first-order time-to-contact based control of the initiation of hand closure did apply in Experiment 2, whereas it did not in Experiment 1. It was concluded that constraining the catching task such that it became unfamiliar led to a hampered timing, thus obstructing the finding of the common control in the previous study, and in Experiment 1 of the current study.

[1]  H. Hecht,et al.  Time-to-contact , 2004 .

[2]  Andrea H. Mason,et al.  Target viewing time and velocity effects on prehension , 1999, Experimental Brain Research.

[3]  J. van der Kamp,et al.  Catching optical information for the regulation of timing , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[4]  J. Tresilian.  Empirical and theoretical issues in the perception of time to contact. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  A. Opstal.  Dynamic Patterns: The Self-Organization of Brain and Behavior , 1995 .

[6]  R J Bootsma,et al.  Visual information about time-to-collision between two objects. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[8]  Frank T. J. M. Zaal,et al.  Dynamics of reaching for stationary and moving objects: Data and Model , 1999 .

[9]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[10]  C. Michaels,et al.  Information and action in punching a falling ball , 2001, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[11]  David N. Lee,et al.  Visual Timing in Hitting An Accelerating Ball , 1983, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[12]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[13]  H Carnahan,et al.  The influence of aging and target motion on the control of prehension. , 1998, Experimental aging research.

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

[15]  R. J. Bootsma,et al.  Coordination in prehension Information-based coupling of reaching and grasping , 1998, Experimental Brain Research.

[16]  R. Bootsma,et al.  Chapter 17 The use of time-to-contact information for the initiation of hand closure in natural prehension , 2004 .

[17]  Gregor Schöner,et al.  Dynamic theory of action-perception patterns: The time-before-contact paradigm , 1994 .

[18]  Claire F. Michaels,et al.  Information and action in timing the punch of a falling ball , 2001 .

[19]  David N. Lee,et al.  Plummeting gannets: a paradigm of ecological optics , 1981, Nature.

[20]  L. Fogassi,et al.  Prehension movements directed to approaching objects: Influence of stimulus velocity on the transport and the grasp components , 1992, Neuropsychologia.

[21]  Gilles Montagne,et al.  Planning and on-line control of catching as a function of perceptual-motor constraints. , 2007, Acta psychologica.

[22]  R. Bakeman.  Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs , 2005, Behavior research methods.

[23]  R. Bootsma,et al.  On the information-based regulation of movement: What Wann (1996) may want to consider , 1997 .

[24]  Cornelis van de Kamp,et al.  Getting hold of approaching objects: in search of a common control of hand-closure initiation in catching and grasping. , 2010, Human movement science.

[25]  W. Warren.  Action modes and laws of control for the visual guidance of action , 1988 .

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

[27]  A. Gordon,et al.  Effects of a moving target versus a temporal constraint on reach and grasp in patients with Parkinson's disease , 2008, Experimental Neurology.

[28]  J. A. Scott Kelso,et al.  The perceptual guidance of grasping a moving object , 1992 .

[29]  G. Ermentrout.  Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior , 1997 .

[30]  G. J. P. Savelsbergh,et al.  The visual guidance of catching , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[31]  C. E. Peper,et al.  Chapter 12 Predictive Visual Information Sources for the Regulation of Action with Special Emphasis on Catching and Hitting , 1992 .

[32]  Digby Elliott,et al.  Vision and motor control , 1992 .

[33]  B J McFadyen,et al.  Visuomotor control when reaching toward and grasping moving targets. , 1996, Acta psychologica.