Literature DB >> 10229019

The role of visual feedback of hand position in the control of manual prehension.

J D Connolly1, M A Goodale.   

Abstract

Although it is obvious that vision plays a primary role in reaching and grasping objects, the sources of the visual information used in programming and controlling various aspects of these movements is still being investigated. One source of visual information is feedback relating to the characteristics of the reach itself for example, the speed and trajectory of the moving limb and the change in the posture of the hand and fingers. The present study selectively eliminated this source of visual information by blocking the subject's view of the reaching limb with an opaque barrier while still enabling subjects to view the goal object. Thus, a direct comparison was made between standard (closed-loop) and object-only (open-loop) visual-feedback conditions in a situation in which the light levels and contrast between an object and its surroundings were equivalent in both viewing conditions. Reach duration was longer with proportionate increases in both the acceleration and deceleration phases when visual feedback of the reaching limb was prevented. Maximum grip aperture and the proportion of movement time at which it occurred were the same in both conditions. Thus, in contrast to previous studies that did not employ constant light levels across closed- and open-loop reaching conditions, a dissociation was found between the spatial and temporal dimensions of grip formation. It appears that the posture of the hand can be programmed without visual feedback of the hand--presumably via a combination of visual information about the goal object and proprioceptive feedback (and/or efference copy). Nevertheless, maximum grip aperture (like the kinematic markers examined in the transport component) was also delayed when visual feedback of the reaching limb was selectively prevented. In other words, the relative timing of kinematic events was essentially unchanged, reflecting perhaps a tight coupling between the transport and grip components.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10229019     DOI: 10.1007/s002210050684

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  36 in total

1.  The use of visual feedback and on-line target information in catching and grasping.

Authors:  Thomas Schenk; Barbara Mair; Josef Zihl
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-09-12       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Effects of object shape and visual feedback on hand configuration during grasping.

Authors:  Luis F Schettino; Sergei V Adamovich; Howard Poizner
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-06-03       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  The role of vision on hand preshaping during reach to grasp.

Authors:  Sara A Winges; Douglas J Weber; Marco Santello
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-07-26       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Grasping in absence of feedback: systematic biases endure extensive training.

Authors:  Chiara Bozzacchi; Robert Volcic; Fulvio Domini
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-10-08       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Lack of depth constancy for grasping movements in both virtual and real environments.

Authors:  Chiara Bozzacchi; Fulvio Domini
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Müller-Lyer figures influence the online reorganization of visually guided grasping movements.

Authors:  Matthew Heath; Christina Rival; Kristina Neely; Olav Krigolson
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-11-16       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Visual guidance of the human foot during a step.

Authors:  Raymond F Reynolds; Brian L Day
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2005-09-22       Impact factor: 5.182

8.  Visual information throughout a reach determines endpoint precision.

Authors:  Anna Ma-Wyatt; Suzanne P McKee
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-11-16       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Role of vision in aperture closure control during reach-to-grasp movements.

Authors:  Miya K Rand; Martin Lemay; Linda M Squire; Yury P Shimansky; George E Stelmach
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-05-03       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Direction-dependent differences in temporal kinematics for vertical prehension movements.

Authors:  Shinji Yamamoto; Keisuke Kushiro
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-11-29       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.