Literature DB >> 15190097

Gaze affects pointing toward remembered visual targets after a self-initiated step.

M A Admiraal1, N L W Keijsers, C C A M Gielen.   

Abstract

We have investigated pointing movements toward remembered targets after an intervening self-generated body movement. We tested to what extent visual information about the environment or finger position is used in updating target position relative to the body after a step and whether gaze plays a role in the accuracy of the pointing movement. Subjects were tested in three visual conditions: complete darkness (DARK), complete darkness with visual feedback of the finger (FINGER), and with vision of a well-defined environment and with feedback of the finger (FRAME). Pointing accuracy was rather poor in the FINGER and DARK conditions, which did not provide vision of the environment. Constant pointing errors were mainly in the direction of the step and ranged from about 10 to 20 cm. Differences between binocular fixation and target position were often related to the step size and direction. At the beginning of the trial, when the target was visible, fixation was on target. After target extinction, fixation moved away from the target relative to the subject. The variability in the pointing positions appeared to be related to the variable errors in fixation, and the co-variance increases during the delay period after the step, reaching a highly significant value at the time of pointing. The significant co-variance between fixation position and pointing is not the result of a mutual dependence on the step, since we corrected for any direct contributions of the step in both signals. We conclude that the co-variance between fixation and pointing position reflects 1) a common command signal for gaze and arm movements and 2) an effect of fixation on pointing accuracy at the time of pointing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15190097     DOI: 10.1152/jn.01046.2003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  8 in total

1.  Neural representation during visually guided reaching in macaque posterior parietal cortex.

Authors:  Barbara Heider; Anushree Karnik; Nirmala Ramalingam; Ralph M Siegel
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-09-15       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Different damping responses explain vertical endpoint error differences between visual conditions.

Authors:  Jan M Hondzinski; Chelsea M Soebbing; Allyson E French; Sara A Winges
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Allocentric cues do not always improve whole body reaching performance.

Authors:  Jan M Hondzinski; Yongqin Cui
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-03-25       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Pointing control using a moving base of support.

Authors:  Jan M Hondzinski; Taegyong Kwon
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-06-21       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 5.  Spatial constancy mechanisms in motor control.

Authors:  W Pieter Medendorp
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2011-02-27       Impact factor: 6.237

6.  Control at stability's edge minimizes energetic costs: expert stick balancing.

Authors:  John Milton; Ryan Meyer; Max Zhvanetsky; Sarah Ridge; Tamás Insperger
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 7.  Spatial updating and the maintenance of visual constancy.

Authors:  E M Klier; D E Angelaki
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2008-08-22       Impact factor: 3.590

8.  Covert oculo-manual coupling induced by visually guided saccades.

Authors:  Luca Falciati; Tiziana Gianesini; Claudio Maioli
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2013-10-10       Impact factor: 3.169

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.