Literature DB >> 19198815

The role of binocular vision in grasping: a small stimulus-set distorts results.

Bruce D Keefe1, Simon J Watt.   

Abstract

The role of binocular vision in grasping has frequently been assessed by measuring the effects on grasp kinematics of covering one eye. These studies have typically used three or fewer objects presented at three or fewer distances, raising the possibility that participants learn the properties of the stimulus set. If so, even relatively poor visual information may be sufficient to identify which object/distance configuration is presented on a given trial, in effect providing an additional source of depth information. Here we show that the availability of this uncontrolled cue leads to an underestimate of the effects of removing binocular information, and therefore to an overestimate of the effectiveness of the remaining cues. We measured the effects of removing binocular cues on visually open-loop grasps using (1) a conventional small stimulus-set, and (2) a large, pseudo-randomised stimulus set, which could not be learned. Removing binocular cues resulted in a significant change in grip aperture scaling in both conditions: peak grip apertures were larger (when reaching to small objects), and scaled less with increases in object size. However, this effect was significantly larger with the randomised stimulus set. These results confirm that binocular information makes a significant contribution to grasp planning. Moreover, they suggest that learned stimulus information can contribute to grasping in typical experiments, and so the contribution of information from binocular vision (and from other depth cues) may not have been measured accurately.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19198815     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-009-1718-4

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


  20 in total

1.  Role of familiar size in the control of grasping.

Authors:  J J Marotta; M A Goodale
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2001-01-01       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Grasp size and accuracy of approach in reaching.

Authors:  A M Wing; A Turton; C Fraser
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 1.328

3.  Factors affecting higher-order movement planning: a kinematic analysis of human prehension.

Authors:  L S Jakobson; M A Goodale
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Matching boxes: familiar size influences action programming.

Authors:  Robert D McIntosh; Gavin Lashley
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2008-03-15       Impact factor: 3.139

5.  Weighted linear cue combination with possibly correlated error.

Authors:  Ipek Oruç; Laurence T Maloney; Michael S Landy
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  The necessity of a perception-action approach to definite distance perception: monocular distance perception to guide reaching.

Authors:  G P Bingham; C C Pagano
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  [Distance perception as a function of available visual cues].

Authors:  T Künnapas
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1968-08

8.  Do humans optimally integrate stereo and texture information for judgments of surface slant?

Authors:  David C Knill; Jeffrey A Saunders
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Effects of visual uncertainty on grasping movements.

Authors:  Erik J Schlicht; Paul R Schrater
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-05-15       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  When two eyes are better than one in prehension: monocular viewing and end-point variance.

Authors:  Andrea Loftus; Philip Servos; Melvyn A Goodale; Nicole Mendarozqueta; Mark Mon-Williams
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-05-26       Impact factor: 1.972

View more
  14 in total

1.  Stereopsis contributes to the predictive control of grip forces during prehension.

Authors:  Corey A Mroczkowski; Ewa Niechwiej-Szwedo
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2021-03-04       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Gaze-grasp coordination in obstacle avoidance: differences between binocular and monocular viewing.

Authors:  Simon Grant
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-08-23       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Binocular Viewing Facilitates Size Constancy for Grasping and Manual Estimation.

Authors:  Ewa Niechwiej-Szwedo; Michael Cao; Michael Barnett-Cowan
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-20

4.  Visual uncertainty unveils the distinct role of haptic cues in multisensory grasping.

Authors:  Ivan Camponogara; Robert Volcic
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2022-05-31

Review 5.  The cognitive neuroscience of prehension: recent developments.

Authors:  Scott T Grafton
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Binocular advantage for prehension movements performed in visually enriched environments requiring visual search.

Authors:  Roshani Gnanaseelan; Dave A Gonzalez; Ewa Niechwiej-Szwedo
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-11-28       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  Dressmakers show enhanced stereoscopic vision.

Authors:  Adrien Chopin; Dennis M Levi; Daphné Bavelier
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-06-13       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  The role of binocular disparity in stereoscopic images of objects in the macaque anterior intraparietal area.

Authors:  Maria C Romero; Ilse C L Van Dromme; Peter Janssen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-07       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  The contributions of vision and haptics to reaching and grasping.

Authors:  Kayla D Stone; Claudia L R Gonzalez
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-09-16

10.  Viewing geometry determines the contribution of binocular vision to the online control of grasping.

Authors:  Bruce D Keefe; Simon J Watt
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-09-12       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.