Literature DB >> 9787054

Perception and action in depth.

D P Carey1, H C Dijkerman, A D Milner.   

Abstract

Little is known about distance processing in patients with posterior brain damage. Although many investigators have claimed that distance estimates are normal or abnormal in some of these patients, many of these observations were made informally and the examiners often asked for relative, and not absolute, distance estimates. The present investigation served two purposes. First, we wanted to contrast the use of distance information in peripersonal space for perceptual report as opposed to visuomotor control in our visual form agnosic patient, DF. Second, we wanted to see to what extent her abilities to process distance cues were dependent on binocular vision, in light of Milner et al.'s (1991) observations of preserved stereopsis in DF, and Dijkerman et al.'s (1996) and Marotta et al.'s (1997) observations that her visual guidance of grasping may be particularly dependent on binocular vision of the target. We hypothesized that DF's visuomotor responses would show normal sensitivity to target distance, while her perceptual estimates would not. In the first experiment, we required DF and two age- and sex-matched control subjects to reach out and grasp black cubes placed at varying distances, or to estimate the distance of the cubes from the hand starting position without making a reaching movement. In the second experiment, we required DF and two age-matched control subjects to point as rapidly and accurately as possible to small LED targets which differed in spatial location, under binocular and monocular conditions. The results showed that, relative to the control subjects, DF's grasping movements produced normal peak velocity-distance scaling-when she reached for blocks which varied in depth or pointed to LED targets which were presented at different distances in depth. In contrast, in the cube experiment, her verbal estimates of object distance were poorly scaled, although they improved slightly under the binocular conditions. The results are discussed in terms of current theories of processing streams in extrastriate visual cortex and the distinction between categorical and coordinate spatial processing. Copyright 1998 Academic Press.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9787054     DOI: 10.1006/ccog.1998.0366

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Conscious Cogn        ISSN: 1053-8100


  7 in total

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

Authors:  Chiara Bozzacchi; Fulvio Domini
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Parietal reach region encodes reach depth using retinal disparity and vergence angle signals.

Authors:  Rajan Bhattacharyya; Sam Musallam; Richard A Andersen
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-05-13       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Expectation affects verbal judgments but not reaches to visually perceived egocentric distances.

Authors:  Christopher C Pagano; Robert W Isenhower
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2008-04

4.  Comparing distance perception in different virtual environments.

Authors:  Chiara Saracini; Ronny Franke; Eberhard Blümel; Marta Olivetti Belardinelli
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2009-09

5.  Binocular Viewing Facilitates Size Constancy for Grasping and Manual Estimation.

Authors:  Ewa Niechwiej-Szwedo; Michael Cao; Michael Barnett-Cowan
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-20

6.  Impaired distance perception and size constancy following bilateral occipitoparietal damage.

Authors:  Marian E Berryhill; Robert Fendrich; Ingrid R Olson
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-01-30       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 7.  Virtually the same? How impaired sensory information in virtual reality may disrupt vision for action.

Authors:  David J Harris; Gavin Buckingham; Mark R Wilson; Samuel J Vine
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-09-04       Impact factor: 1.972

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.