Manual asymmetries in bimanual prehension tasks: manipulation of object size and object distance.

Two experiments were designed to investigate the temporal and spatial couplings of the transport and grasp components for bimanual movements to both congruent and incongruent targets. We studied conditions where task requirements were largely different for the two hands. Ten participants performed Experiment 1 and were required to reach for, grasp, and lift two small (1 mm) cylinders, two large (70 mm) cylinders, or one small and one large cylinder with the right and left hands. In Experiment 2, 10 participants were required to reach for, grasp, and lift two objects that were positioned either near (50mm) the start mark, far (maximum comfortable reaching distance) from the start mark, or one near and one far from the start mark. Kinematic measures, relative timing differences between the hands and spatial plots were used to quantify both temporal and spatial couplings of the limbs. For temporal coupling, the results from both experiments indicated that the upper limbs were controlled independently with some execution-level interference occurring for the transport component only. In terms of spatial coupling our results indicated weak coupling of the grasp component regardless of task parameters (i.e., congruent or incongruent movements) and a dependence on task parameters in determining the level of spatial coupling for the transport component. These results can be collectively interpreted as evidence for a functional coupling of the upper limbs. That is, the movements of the hands may be coupled during tasks in which temporal and spatial synchronizations are beneficial for performance. However, if the coupling of the upper limbs is either unimportant or perhaps even detrimental to the coordination of the overall movement, then the upper limbs may perform the desired movements independently of one another.

[1]  Wilfried Kunde,et al.  Goal congruency in bimanual object manipulation. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  H Heuer,et al.  Structural constraints on bimanual movements , 1993, Psychological research.

[3]  M Wiesendanger,et al.  Is the supplementary motor area a bilaterally organized system? , 1996, Advances in neurology.

[4]  Andrea H. Mason,et al.  Coordination and control of bimanual prehension: effects of perturbing object location , 2008, Experimental Brain Research.

[5]  C. MacKenzie,et al.  10 A Preliminary Theory of Two-Hand Cd-Ordinated Control , 1980 .

[6]  L. Jakobson,et al.  Control of proximal and distal components of prehension in callosal agenesis. , 1994, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[7]  J. I. Todor,et al.  EXERTION LEVEL AND THE INTENSITY OF ASSOCIATED MOVEMENTS , 1986, Developmental medicine and child neurology.

[8]  H. Durwen,et al.  Electromyographic investigation of mirror movements in normal adults: variation of frequency with site, effort and repetition of movements , 1992 .

[9]  B. Preilowski,et al.  Bilateral Motor Interaction: Perceptual-Motor Performance of Partial and Complete “Split-Brain” Patients , 1975 .

[10]  G. Stelmach,et al.  The co-ordination and phasing of a bilateral prehension task. The influence of Parkinson's disease. , 1998, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[11]  K. Peacock,et al.  Functional coupling between the limbs during bimanual reach-to-grasp movements. , 2002, Human movement science.

[12]  B. Bergum,et al.  Attention and performance IX , 1982 .

[13]  S. Cardoso de Oliveira The neuronal basis of bimanual coordination: recent neurophysiological evidence and functional models. , 2002, Acta psychologica.

[14]  C. MacKenzie,et al.  The speed-accuracy trade-off in manual prehension: effects of movement amplitude, object size and object width on kinematic characteristics , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[15]  H. Freund,et al.  Different coupling for the reach and grasp components in bimanual prehension movements , 2000, Neuroreport.

[16]  W Spijkers,et al.  Specification of movement amplitudes for the left and right hands: evidence for transient parametric coupling from overlapping-task performance. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  Christine L. MacKenzie,et al.  Functional relationships between grasp and transport components in a prehension task , 1990 .

[18]  E Vaadia,et al.  Who Tells One Hand What the Other Is Doing The Neurophysiology of Bimanual Movements , 1999, Neuron.

[19]  R. Ivry,et al.  Moving to Directly Cued Locations Abolishes Spatial Interference During Bimanual Actions , 2001, Psychological science.

[20]  D Goodman,et al.  On the coordination of two-handed movements. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  C. MacKenzie,et al.  Bimanual Movement Control: Information processing and Interaction Effects , 1984 .

[22]  R. Ivry,et al.  Independent on‐line control of the two hands during bimanual reaching , 2004, The European journal of neuroscience.

[23]  W. Prinz,et al.  End-state comfort in bimanual object manipulation. , 2006, Experimental psychology.

[24]  G. Stelmach,et al.  Tutorials in Motor Behavior , 1980 .

[25]  S. Riek,et al.  Bimanual aiming and overt attention: one law for two hands , 2003, Experimental Brain Research.

[26]  S. Jackson,et al.  Attention for action: coordinating bimanual reach-to-grasp movements. , 1999, British journal of psychology.

[27]  M. Jeannerod Intersegmental coordination during reaching at natural visual objects , 1981 .

[28]  A. Mason Performance of Unimanual and Bimanual Multiphased Prehensile Movements , 2007, Journal of motor behavior.

[29]  Will Spijkers,et al.  Static and Phasic Cross-Talk Effects in Discrete Bimanual Reversal Movements , 2001, Journal of motor behavior.

[30]  M. Gazzaniga,et al.  Dissociation of Spatial and Temporal Coupling in the Bimanual Movements of Callosotomy Patients , 1996 .

[31]  Geoffrey P. Bingham,et al.  The coordination patterns observed when two hands reach-to-grasp separate objects , 2007, Experimental Brain Research.