Literature DB >> 26269553

Lack of depth constancy for grasping movements in both virtual and real environments.

Chiara Bozzacchi1, Fulvio Domini2.   

Abstract

Recent studies on visuomotor processes using virtual setups have suggested that actions are affected by similar biases as perceptual tasks. In particular, a strong lack of depth constancy is revealed, resembling biases in perceptual estimates of relative depth. With this study we aim to understand whether these findings are mostly caused by a lack of metric accuracy of the visuomotor system or by the limited cues provided by the use of virtual reality. We addressed this issue by comparing grasping movements towards a spherical object located at four distances (420, 450, 480, and 510 mm) performed in three conditions: 1) virtual, in which the target was a virtual object defined by binocular cues, 2) glow-in-the-dark, in which the object was painted with luminous paint but no other cue was provided, and 3) full-cue, in which the movement was performed with the lights on and all the environmental information was available. Results revealed a striking effect of object distance on grip aperture equally in all three conditions. Specifically, grip aperture gradually decreased with increase in object distance, proving a consistent lack of depth constancy. These findings clearly demonstrate that systematic biases in grasping actions are not induced by the use of virtual environments and that action and perception may involve the same visual information, which does not engage a metric reconstruction of the scene.
Copyright © 2015 the American Physiological Society.

Keywords:  3D; depth constancy; grasping; virtual reality; visuomotor control

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26269553      PMCID: PMC4600967          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00350.2015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  36 in total

1.  The role of visual feedback of hand position in the control of manual prehension.

Authors:  J D Connolly; M A Goodale
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Vision of the hand and environmental context in human prehension.

Authors:  A Churchill; B Hopkins; L Rönnqvist; S Vogt
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Perceived distance, shape and size.

Authors:  E Brenner; W J van Damme
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Reaching for virtual objects: binocular disparity and the control of prehension.

Authors:  Paul B Hibbard; Mark F Bradshaw
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2002-11-19       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  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

6.  Stereoscopic depth constancy depends on the subject's task.

Authors:  A Glennerster; B J Rogers; M F Bradshaw
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Perceived 3D metric (or Euclidean) shape is merely ambiguous, not systematically distorted.

Authors:  Young Lim Lee; Mats Lind; Geoffrey P Bingham
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-11-23       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Discovering affordances that determine the spatial structure of reach-to-grasp movements.

Authors:  Mark Mon-Williams; Geoffrey P Bingham
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-04-12       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  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

10.  Holding an object one is looking at: kinesthetic information on the object's distance does not improve visual judgments of its size.

Authors:  E Brenner; W J van Damme; J B Smeets
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1997-10
View more
  6 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.  On-line visual control of grasping movements.

Authors:  Robert Volcic; Fulvio Domini
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Some binocular advantages for planning reach, but not grasp, components of prehension.

Authors:  Simon Grant; Miriam L Conway
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-03-08       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Size matters: How reaching and vergence movements are influenced by the familiar size of stereoscopically presented objects.

Authors:  Rebekka S Schubert; Maarten L Jung; Jens R Helmert; Boris M Velichkovsky; Sebastian Pannasch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-20       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  How removing visual information affects grasping movements.

Authors:  Chiara Bozzacchi; Eli Brenner; Jeroen B Smeets; Robert Volcic; Fulvio Domini
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  The endless visuomotor calibration of reach-to-grasp actions.

Authors:  Robert Volcic; Fulvio Domini
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-10-04       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.