Literature DB >> 19949777

Integration of haptic and visual size cues in perception and action revealed through cross-modal conflict.

Charles E Pettypiece1, Melvyn A Goodale, Jody C Culham.   

Abstract

We investigated the contribution of haptic and visual information about object size to both perception and action. Kinematics of the right hand were measured while participants performed grasping actions or manual estimations under the guidance of haptic information from the left hand, binocular visual information, or both haptics and vision. The greatest uncertainty was observed with haptic information alone. Moreover, when visual and haptic sizes were congruent, performance was no different from that with vision alone. Although this gives the appearance that vision dominates, when information from the two senses was incongruent, an influence of haptic cues emerged for both tasks. Our paradigm also allowed us to demonstrate that haptic sensitivity, like visual sensitivity, scales with object size for manual estimation (consistent with Weber's law) but not for grasping. In sum, although haptics represents a less certain source of information, haptic processing follows similar principles to vision and its contribution to perception and action becomes evident only when cross-modal information is incongruent.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19949777     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-009-2101-1

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


  22 in total

1.  Grasping after a delay shifts size-scaling from absolute to relative metrics.

Authors:  Y Hu; M A Goodale
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  The accuracy of reaching movements in brief delay conditions.

Authors:  D A Westwood; M Heath; E A Roy
Journal:  Can J Exp Psychol       Date:  2001-12

3.  Perceptual illusion and the real-time control of action.

Authors:  David A Westwood; Melvyn A Goodale
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  2003

4.  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

5.  Differential effects of delay upon visually and haptically guided grasping and perceptual judgments.

Authors:  Charles E Pettypiece; Jody C Culham; Melvyn A Goodale
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-04-29       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand.

Authors:  S Aglioti; J F DeSouza; M A Goodale
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  1995-06-01       Impact factor: 10.834

7.  Coordination between the transport and the grasp components during prehension movements.

Authors:  S Chieffi; M Gentilucci
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  A neurological dissociation between perceiving objects and grasping them.

Authors:  M A Goodale; A D Milner; L S Jakobson; D P Carey
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1991-01-10       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  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

10.  Optimal integration of shape information from vision and touch.

Authors:  Hannah B Helbig; Marc O Ernst
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-01-16       Impact factor: 2.064

View more
  18 in total

1.  Hand shaping using hapsis resembles visually guided hand shaping.

Authors:  Jenni M Karl; Lori-Ann R Sacrey; Jon B Doan; Ian Q Whishaw
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Oral hapsis guides accurate hand preshaping for grasping food targets in the mouth.

Authors:  Jenni M Karl; Lori-Ann R Sacrey; Jon B Doan; Ian Q Whishaw
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-07-11       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Grasping a 2D object: terminal haptic feedback supports an absolute visuo-haptic calibration.

Authors:  Stephanie Hosang; Jillian Chan; Shirin Davarpanah Jazi; Matthew Heath
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Integration of visual and auditory information for hand actions: preliminary evidence for the contribution of natural sounds to grasping.

Authors:  Anna Sedda; Simona Monaco; Gabriella Bottini; Melvyn A Goodale
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-02-03       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Remember the touch: tactile distractors retrieve previous responses to targets.

Authors:  Birte Moeller; Christian Frings
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-08-07       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Nonvisual learning of intrinsic object properties in a reaching task dissociates grasp from reach.

Authors:  Jenni M Karl; Leandra R Schneider; Ian Q Whishaw
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Reach and Grasp reconfigurations reveal that proprioception assists reaching and hapsis assists grasping in peripheral vision.

Authors:  Lauren A Hall; Jenni M Karl; Brittany L Thomas; Ian Q Whishaw
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-05-04       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Pantomime-grasping: the 'return' of haptic feedback supports the absolute specification of object size.

Authors:  Shirin Davarpanah Jazi; Michelle Yau; David A Westwood; Matthew Heath
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Vision for action and perception elicit dissociable adherence to Weber's law across a range of 'graspable' target objects.

Authors:  Matthew Heath; Joseph Manzone; Michaela Khan; Shirin Davarpanah Jazi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Synchrony of the Reach and the Grasp in pantomime reach-to-grasp.

Authors:  Jessica R Kuntz; Ian Q Whishaw
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-07-22       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.