Literature DB >> 22120106

Prospective versus predictive control in timing of hitting a falling ball.

Hiromu Katsumata1, Daniel M Russell.   

Abstract

Debate exists as to whether humans use prospective or predictive control to intercept an object falling under gravity (Baurès et al. in Vis Res 47:2982-2991, 2007; Zago et al. in Vis Res 48:1532-1538, 2008). Prospective control involves using continuous information to regulate action. τ, the ratio of the size of the gap to the rate of gap closure, has been proposed as the information used in guiding interceptive actions prospectively (Lee in Ecol Psychol 10:221-250, 1998). This form of control is expected to generate movement modulation, where variability decreases over the course of an action based upon more accurate timing information. In contrast, predictive control assumes that a pre-programmed movement is triggered at an appropriate criterion timing variable. For a falling object it is commonly argued that an internal model of gravitational acceleration is used to predict the motion of the object and determine movement initiation. This form of control predicts fixed duration movements initiated at consistent time-to-contact (TTC), either across conditions (constant criterion operational timing) or within conditions (variable criterion operational timing). The current study sought to test predictive and prospective control hypotheses by disrupting continuous visual information of a falling ball and examining consistency in movement initiation and duration, and evidence for movement modulation. Participants (n = 12) batted a ball dropped from three different heights (1, 1.3 and 1.5 m), under both full-vision and partial occlusion conditions. In the occlusion condition, only the initial ball drop and the final 200 ms of ball flight to the interception point could be observed. The initiation of the swing did not occur at a consistent TTC, τ, or any other timing variable across drop heights, in contrast with previous research. However, movement onset was not impacted by occluding the ball flight for 280-380 ms. This finding indicates that humans did not need to be continuously coupled to vision of the ball to initiate the swing accurately, but instead could use predictive control based on acceleration timing information (TTC2). However, other results provide evidence for movement modulation, a characteristic of prospective control. Strong correlations between movement initiation and duration and reduced timing variability from swing onset to arrival at the interception point, both support compensatory variability. An analysis of modulation within the swing revealed that early in the swing, the movement acceleration was strongly correlated to the required mean velocity at swing onset and that later in the swing, the movement acceleration was again strongly correlated with the current required mean velocity. Rather than a consistent movement initiated at the same time, these findings show that the swing was variable but modulated for meeting the demands of each trial. A prospective model of coupling τ (bat-ball) with τ (ball-target) was found to provide a very strong linear fit for an average of 69% of the movement duration. These findings provide evidence for predictive control based on TTC2 information in initiating the swing and prospective control based on τ in guiding the bat to intercept the ball.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22120106     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-011-2954-y

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


  32 in total

1.  Sensory and intrinsic coordination of movement.

Authors:  D N Lee; C M Craig; M A Grealy
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  1999-10-07       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Target viewing time and velocity effects on prehension.

Authors:  A H Mason; H Carnahan
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Internal models of target motion: expected dynamics overrides measured kinematics in timing manual interceptions.

Authors:  Myrka Zago; Gianfranco Bosco; Vincenzo Maffei; Marco Iosa; Yuri P Ivanenko; Francesco Lacquaniti
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2003-11-19       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Visual processing of optic acceleration.

Authors:  P Werkhoven; H P Snippe; A Toet
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Movement reversals in ball catching.

Authors:  G Montagne; M Laurent; A Durey; R Bootsma
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Control strategies in directing the hand to moving targets.

Authors:  P van Donkelaar; R G Lee; R S Gellman
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 7.  Internal models and prediction of visual gravitational motion.

Authors:  Myrka Zago; Joseph McIntyre; Patrice Senot; Francesco Lacquaniti
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Anticipatory and reflex coactivation of antagonist muscles in catching.

Authors:  F Lacquaniti; C Maioli
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1987-03-17       Impact factor: 3.252

9.  The role of preparation in tuning anticipatory and reflex responses during catching.

Authors:  F Lacquaniti; C Maioli
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Processing visual feedback information for movement control.

Authors:  L G Carlton
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1981-10       Impact factor: 3.332

View more
  14 in total

1.  (De)synchronization of advanced visual information and ball flight characteristics constrains emergent information-movement couplings during one-handed catching.

Authors:  J A Stone; I W Maynard; J S North; D Panchuk; K Davids
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-11-02       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Differential contributions to the interception of occluded ballistic trajectories by the temporoparietal junction, area hMT/V5+, and the intraparietal cortex.

Authors:  Sergio Delle Monache; Francesco Lacquaniti; Gianfranco Bosco
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 3.  On-line and model-based approaches to the visual control of action.

Authors:  Huaiyong Zhao; William H Warren
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2014-10-20       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Hand interception of occluded motion in humans: a test of model-based vs. on-line control.

Authors:  Barbara La Scaleia; Myrka Zago; Francesco Lacquaniti
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Catching what we can't see: manual interception of occluded fly-ball trajectories.

Authors:  Gianfranco Bosco; Sergio Delle Monache; Francesco Lacquaniti
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-14       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Filling gaps in visual motion for target capture.

Authors:  Gianfranco Bosco; Sergio Delle Monache; Silvio Gravano; Iole Indovina; Barbara La Scaleia; Vincenzo Maffei; Myrka Zago; Francesco Lacquaniti
Journal:  Front Integr Neurosci       Date:  2015-02-23

7.  Precise timing when hitting falling balls.

Authors:  Eli Brenner; Ben Driesen; Jeroen B J Smeets
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-05-22       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  Spatiotemporal characteristics of muscle patterns for ball catching.

Authors:  M D'Andola; B Cesqui; A Portone; L Fernandez; F Lacquaniti; A d'Avella
Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci       Date:  2013-08-07       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 9.  Visual gravitational motion and the vestibular system in humans.

Authors:  Francesco Lacquaniti; Gianfranco Bosco; Iole Indovina; Barbara La Scaleia; Vincenzo Maffei; Alessandro Moscatelli; Myrka Zago
Journal:  Front Integr Neurosci       Date:  2013-12-26

10.  Neural extrapolation of motion for a ball rolling down an inclined plane.

Authors:  Barbara La Scaleia; Francesco Lacquaniti; Myrka Zago
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-06-18       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.