Literature DB >> 25311389

Eye movements and manual interception of ballistic trajectories: effects of law of motion perturbations and occlusions.

Sergio Delle Monache1, Francesco Lacquaniti, Gianfranco Bosco.   

Abstract

Manual interceptions are known to depend critically on integration of visual feedback information and experience-based predictions of the interceptive event. Within this framework, coupling between gaze and limb movements might also contribute to the interceptive outcome, since eye movements afford acquisition of high-resolution visual information. We investigated this issue by analyzing subjects' head-fixed oculomotor behavior during manual interceptions. Subjects moved a mouse cursor to intercept computer-generated ballistic trajectories either congruent with Earth's gravity or perturbed with weightlessness (0 g) or hypergravity (2 g) effects. In separate sessions, trajectories were either fully visible or occluded before interception to enforce visual prediction. Subjects' oculomotor behavior was classified in terms of amounts of time they gazed at different visual targets and of overall number of saccades. Then, by way of multivariate analyses, we assessed the following: (1) whether eye movement patterns depended on targets' laws of motion and occlusions; and (2) whether interceptive performance was related to the oculomotor behavior. First, we found that eye movement patterns depended significantly on targets' laws of motion and occlusion, suggesting predictive mechanisms. Second, subjects coupled differently oculomotor and interceptive behavior depending on whether targets were visible or occluded. With visible targets, subjects made smaller interceptive errors if they gazed longer at the mouse cursor. Instead, with occluded targets, they achieved better performance by increasing the target's tracking accuracy and by avoiding gaze shifts near interception, suggesting that precise ocular tracking provided better trajectory predictions for the interceptive response.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25311389     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-014-4120-9

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


  104 in total

1.  Gaze anchoring to a pointing target is present during the entire pointing movement and is driven by a non-visual signal.

Authors:  S F Neggers; H Bekkering
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  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

3.  The optic trajectory is not a lot of use if you want to catch the ball.

Authors:  Peter McLeod; Nick Reed; Zoltan Dienes
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Neurons compute internal models of the physical laws of motion.

Authors:  Dora E Angelaki; Aasef G Shaikh; Andrea M Green; J David Dickman
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2004-07-29       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Extrapolation of visual motion for manual interception.

Authors:  John F Soechting; Martha Flanders
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-04-24       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Keep your eyes on the ball: smooth pursuit eye movements enhance prediction of visual motion.

Authors:  Miriam Spering; Alexander C Schütz; Doris I Braun; Karl R Gegenfurtner
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Manual interception of moving targets. I. Performance and movement initiation.

Authors:  N L Port; D Lee; P Dassonville; A P Georgopoulos
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Predictive smooth eye pursuit in a population of young men: I. Effects of age, IQ, oculomotor and cognitive tasks.

Authors:  Emmanouil Kattoulas; Nikolaos Smyrnis; Nicholas C Stefanis; Dimitrios Avramopoulos; Costas N Stefanis; Ioannis Evdokimidis
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-10-11       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Catching fly balls in virtual reality: a critical test of the outfielder problem.

Authors:  Philip W Fink; Patrick S Foo; William H Warren
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2009-12-14       Impact factor: 2.240

10.  Target interception: hand-eye coordination and strategies.

Authors:  Leigh A Mrotek; John F Soechting
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2007-07-04       Impact factor: 6.167

View more
  13 in total

1.  Effects of visual motion consistent or inconsistent with gravity on postural sway.

Authors:  Priscilla Balestrucci; Elena Daprati; Francesco Lacquaniti; Vincenzo Maffei
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-03-22       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

3.  The role of cortical areas hMT/V5+ and TPJ on the magnitude of representational momentum and representational gravity: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study.

Authors:  Nuno Alexandre De Sá Teixeira; Gianfranco Bosco; Sergio Delle Monache; Francesco Lacquaniti
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 1.972

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.  Context effects on smooth pursuit and manual interception of a disappearing target.

Authors:  Philipp Kreyenmeier; Jolande Fooken; Miriam Spering
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-05-17       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Intercepting virtual balls approaching under different gravity conditions: evidence for spatial prediction.

Authors:  Marta Russo; Benedetta Cesqui; Barbara La Scaleia; Francesca Ceccarelli; Antonella Maselli; Alessandro Moscatelli; Myrka Zago; Francesco Lacquaniti; Andrea d'Avella
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 7.  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

8.  Gaze behavior in one-handed catching and its relation with interceptive performance: what the eyes can't tell.

Authors:  Benedetta Cesqui; Maura Mezzetti; Francesco Lacquaniti; Andrea d'Avella
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-20       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Gravity as a Strong Prior: Implications for Perception and Action.

Authors:  Björn Jörges; Joan López-Moliner
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2017-04-28       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  Gravity prior in human behaviour: a perceptual or semantic phenomenon?

Authors:  Maria Gallagher; Agoston Torok; Johanna Klaas; Elisa Raffaella Ferrè
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2020-06-21       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.