Literature DB >> 22323715

No dissociation between perception and action in patient DF when haptic feedback is withdrawn.

Thomas Schenk1.   

Abstract

Goodale et al. (1991) reported a striking dissociation between vision for perception and action. They examined DF, a human patient who had damage to her ventral visual stream and suffered from visual form agnosia. She was unable to perceive an object's size but could match the opening of her hand to the object's size during grasping. It was concluded that grasping relied on a separate representation of visual size in the dorsal stream and required no visual input from the ventral stream. This observation inspired the influential perception-action model, which claimed separate visual streams for perception and action. However, in grasping (but not in corresponding perceptual tasks), participants receive haptic feedback after each trial. Using this feedback, DF might compensate for her impaired size-vision. I reexamined DF's grasping behavior using a mirror apparatus to dissociate the image of an object from its physical presence. DF's grasping was only normal when she received haptic feedback. Thus, in grasping, DF can rely on haptic feedback to compensate for her deficit in size-perception. This can explain why her grasping is significantly better than her perceptual performance. The findings emphasize the extent of early interstream interactions and highlight the multimodal nature of sensory processing in the dorsal stream.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22323715      PMCID: PMC6621711          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3413-11.2012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  32 in total

1.  Grasping in absence of feedback: systematic biases endure extensive training.

Authors:  Chiara Bozzacchi; Robert Volcic; Fulvio Domini
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-10-08       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Online repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to the parietal operculum disrupts haptic memory for grasping.

Authors:  Luigi Cattaneo; Francesca Maule; Davide Tabarelli; Thomas Brochier; Guido Barchiesi
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-08-07       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Perceiving and acting upon weight illusions in the absence of somatosensory information.

Authors:  Gavin Buckingham; Elizabeth Evgenia Michelakakis; Jonathan Cole
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-02-03       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  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

5.  Grasping performance depends upon the richness of hand feedback.

Authors:  Prajith Sivakumar; Derek J Quinlan; Kevin M Stubbs; Jody C Culham
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2021-01-05       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  The Uznadze illusion reveals similar effects of relative size on perception and action.

Authors:  Stefano Uccelli; Veronica Pisu; Lucia Riggio; Nicola Bruno
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-01-25       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Methods to explore the influence of top-down visual processes on motor behavior.

Authors:  Jillian Nguyen; Thomas V Papathomas; Jay H Ravaliya; Elizabeth B Torres
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 1.355

Review 8.  How (and why) the visual control of action differs from visual perception.

Authors:  Melvyn A Goodale
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-04-30       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Haptic feedback attenuates illusory bias in pantomime-grasping: evidence for a visuo-haptic calibration.

Authors:  Jillian Chan; Matthew Heath
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-01-09       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Weber's law in 2D and 3D grasping.

Authors:  Aviad Ozana; Tzvi Ganel
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-09-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.