Literature DB >> 11081827

The effect of a pictorial illusion on closed-loop and open-loop prehension.

D A Westwood1, M Heath, E A Roy.   

Abstract

It has been proposed that movements to visible and remembered targets are sensitive to qualitatively different types of visual information. When the target is continuously visible, prehensile movements are thought to reflect veridical object size, whereas memory-dependent prehension is sensitive to the perceived size of the object. This hypothesis was explored by assessing the influence of illusory target width on prehension kinematics in three visual conditions: closed-loop (CL; full vision during the response), open-loop brief-delay (OL; visual occlusion coincident with the movement initiation cue) and open-loop 3-s delay (OL3; visual occlusion 3 s prior to movement initiation). To modulate illusory target width, objects were placed on backgrounds consisting of three forms of the Müller-Lyer (ML) figure. Peak grip aperture was sensitive to the ML figure in the OL and OL3, but not CL conditions, suggesting that perceptual information is used to modulate this grasping parameter when the movement is programmed and executed on the basis of visual memory. Peak-aperture velocity was affected by the ML illusion in all three visual conditions, suggesting that perceived object size might be important for modulating this aspect of prehension, independent of memory requirements. The different sensitivity of grip aperture and aperture velocity to illusory target width in the CL condition suggests that grasp preshaping might reflect multiple visuomotor processes. The results of this study are consistent with the tenets of the two-stream model of visual processing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11081827     DOI: 10.1007/s002210000489

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


  34 in total

1.  A step and a hop on the Müller-Lyer: illusion effects on lower-limb movements.

Authors:  Scott Glover; Peter Dixon
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-10-25       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  A haptic size-contrast illusion affects size perception but not grasping.

Authors:  David A Westwood; Melvyn A Goodale
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-07-30       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Can the motor system resolve a premovement bias in grip aperture? Online analysis of grasping the Müller-Lyer illusion.

Authors:  Matthew Heath; Christina Rival; Gordon Binsted
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-07-27       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  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

5.  Grasping the Müller-Lyer illusion: not a change in perceived length.

Authors:  Marianne Biegstraaten; Denise D J de Grave; Eli Brenner; Jeroen B J Smeets
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-12-05       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Grasp effects of the Ebbinghaus illusion are ambiguous.

Authors:  R Gilster; J P Kuhtz-Buschbeck; C D Wiesner; R Ferstl
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-04-25       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Goal-directed reaching: movement strategies influence the weighting of allocentric and egocentric visual cues.

Authors:  Kristina A Neely; Ayla Tessmer; Gordon Binsted; Matthew Heath
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-12-18       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Anti-pointing is mediated by a perceptual bias of target location in left and right visual space.

Authors:  Matthew Heath; Anika Maraj; Ashlee Gradkowski; Gordon Binsted
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Antipointing: perception-based visual information renders an offline mode of control.

Authors:  Anika Maraj; Matthew Heath
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-12-12       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Age-related differences in a delayed pointing of a Müller-Lyer illusion.

Authors:  Christina Rival; Isabelle Olivier; Hadrien Ceyte; Carole Ferrel
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-09-26       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.