Is Mislocalization during saccades related to the position of the saccade target within the image or to the gaze position at the end of the saccade?

A stimulus that is flashed around the time of a saccade tends to be mislocalized in the direction of the saccade target. Our question is whether the mislocalization is related to the position of the saccade target within the image or to the gaze position at the end of the saccade. We separated the two with a visual illusion that influences the perceived distance to the target of the saccade and thus saccade endpoint without affecting the perceived position of the saccade target within the image. We asked participants to make horizontal saccades from the left to the right end of the shaft of a Müller-Lyer figure. Around the time of the saccade, we flashed a bar at one of five possible positions and asked participants to indicate its location by touching the screen. As expected, participants made shorter saccades along the fins-in (<->) configuration than along the fins-out (>-<) configuration of the figure. The illusion also influenced the mislocalization pattern during saccades, with flashes presented with the fins-out configuration being perceived beyond flashes presented with the fins-in configuration. The difference between the patterns of mislocalization for bars flashed during the saccade for the two configurations corresponded quantitatively with a prediction based on compression towards the saccade endpoint considering the magnitude of the effect of the illusion on saccade amplitude. We conclude that mislocalization is related to the eye position at the end of the saccade, rather than to the position of the saccade target within the image

The Brentano illusion influences goal-directed movements of the left and right hand to the same extent

Recently, Gonzalez et al. (J Neurophys 95:3496-3501, 2006) reported that movements with the left hand are more susceptible to visual size illusions than are those with the right hand. We hypothesized that this might be because proprioceptive information about the position of the left hand is less precise. If so, the difference between the hands should become clearer when vision of the hand is removed so that subjects can only rely on proprioception to locate their hand. We tested whether this was so by letting right-handed subjects make open-loop pointing movements within an illusory context with and without vision of their hand. On average, the illusion influenced the left and the right hand to the same extent, irrespective of the visibility of the hand. There were some systematic differences between the hands within certain regions of space, but these were not consistent across subjects. We conclude that there is no fundamental difference between the hands in susceptibility to the Brentano illusion

Using a Stick Does Not Necessarily Alter Judged Distances or Reachability

Background It has been reported that participants judge an object to be closer after a stick has been used to touch it than after touching it with the hand. In this study we try to find out why this is so. Methodology We showed six participants a cylindrical object on a table. On separate trials (randomly intermixed) participants either estimated verbally how far the object is from their body or they touched a remembered location. Touching was done either with the hand or with a stick (in separate blocks). In three different sessions, participants touched either the object location or the location halfway to the object location. Verbal judgments were given either in centimeters or in terms of whether the object would be reachable with the hand. No differences in verbal distance judgments or touching responses were found between the blocks in which the stick or the hand was used. Conclusion Instead of finding out why the judged distance changes when using a tool, we found that using a stick does not necessarily alter judged distances or judgments about the reachability of objects

Why are saccades influenced by the Brentano illusion?

In the Brentano version of the Müller-Lyer illusion one part looks longer and the other looks shorter than it really is. We asked participants to make saccadic eye movements along these parts of the figure and between positions on the figure and a position outside the illusion. By showing that saccades from outside the figure are not influenced by the illusion, we demonstrate that the reason that saccades along the figure are influenced is that the incorrectly judged length is used to plan the amplitude of the saccade. This finding contradicts several current views on the use of visual information for action. We conclude that actions are influenced by visual illusions, but that such influences are only apparent if the action is guided by the attribute that is fooled by the illusion. © 2006 Springer-Verlag

Left, right, left, right, eyes to the front! Müller-Lyer bias in grasping is not a function of hand used, hand preferred or visual hemifield, but foveation does matter

We investigated whether the control of movement of the left hand is more likely to involve the use of allocentric information than movements performed with the right hand. Previous studies (Gonzalez et al. in J Neurophys 95:3496–3501, 2006; De Grave et al. in Exp Br Res 193:421–427, 2009) have reported contradictory findings in this respect. In the present study, right-handed participants (N = 12) and left-handed participants (N = 12) made right- and left-handed grasps to foveated objects and peripheral, non-foveated objects that were located in the right or left visual hemifield and embedded within a Müller-Lyer illusion. They were also asked to judge the size of the object by matching their hand aperture to its length. Hand apertures did not show significant differences in illusory bias as a function of hand used, handedness or visual hemifield. However, the illusory effect was significantly larger for perception than for action, and for the non-foveated compared to foveated objects. No significant illusory biases were found for reach movement times. These findings are consistent with the two-visual system model that holds that the use of allocentric information is more prominent in perception than in movement control. We propose that the increased involvement of allocentric information in movements toward peripheral, non-foveated objects may be a consequence of more awkward, less automatized grasps of nonfoveated than foveated objects. The current study does not support the conjecture that the control of left-handed and right-handed grasps is predicated on different sources of information

Gaze-grasp coordination in obstacle avoidance: differences between binocular and monocular viewing

Most adults can skillfully avoid potential obstacles when acting in everyday cluttered scenes. We examined how gaze and hand movements are normally coordinated for obstacle avoidance and whether these are altered when binocular depth information is unavailable. Visual fixations and hand movement kinematics were simultaneously recorded, while 13 right-handed subjects reached-to-precision grasp a cylindrical household object presented alone or with a potential obstacle (wine glass) located to its left (thumb's grasp side), right or just behind it (both closer to the finger's grasp side) using binocular or monocular vision. Gaze and hand movement strategies differed significantly by view and obstacle location. With binocular vision, initial fixations were near the target's centre of mass (COM) around the time of hand movement onset, but usually shifted to end just above the thumb's grasp site at initial object contact, this mainly being made by the thumb, consistent with selecting this digit for guiding the grasp. This strategy was associated with faster binocular hand movements and improved end-point grip precision across all trials than with monocular viewing, during which subjects usually continued to fixate the target closer to its COM despite a similar prevalence of thumb-first contacts. While subjects looked directly at the obstacle at each location on a minority of trials and their overall fixations on the target were somewhat biased towards the grasp side nearest to it, these gaze behaviours were particularly marked on monocular vision-obstacle behind trials which also commonly ended in finger-first contact. Subjects avoided colliding with the wine glass under both views when on the right (finger side) of the workspace by producing slower and straighter reaches, with this and the behind obstacle location also resulting in 'safer' (i.e. narrower) peak grip apertures and longer deceleration times than when the goal object was alone or the obstacle was on its thumb side. But monocular reach paths were more variable and deceleration times were selectively prolonged on finger-side and behind obstacle trials, with this latter condition further resulting in selectively increased grip closure times and corrections. Binocular vision thus provided added advantages for collision avoidance, known to require intact dorsal cortical stream processing mechanisms, particularly when the target of the grasp and potential obstacle to it were fairly closely separated in depth. Different accounts of the altered monocular gaze behaviour converged on the conclusion that additional perceptual and/or attentional resources are likely engaged compared to when continuous binocular depth information is available. Implications for people lacking binocular stereopsis are briefly considered

The Remapping of Time by Active Tool-Use

Multiple, action-based space representations are each based on the extent to which action is possible toward a specific sector of space, such as near/reachable and far/unreachable. Studies on tool-use revealed how the boundaries between these representations are dynamic. Space is not only multidimensional and dynamic, but it is also known for interacting with other dimensions of magnitude, such as time. However, whether time operates on similar action-driven multiple representations and whether it can be modulated by tool-use is yet unknown. To address these issues, healthy participants performed a time bisection task in two spatial positions (near and far space) before and after an active tool-use training, which consisted of performing goal-directed actions holding a tool with their right hand (Experiment 1). Before training, perceived stimuli duration was influenced by their spatial position defined by action. Hence, a dissociation emerged between near/reachable and far/unreachable space. Strikingly, this dissociation disappeared after the active tool-use training since temporal stimuli were now perceived as nearer. The remapping was not found when a passive tool-training was executed (Experiment 2) or when the active tool-training was performed with participants’ left hand (Experiment 3). Moreover, no time remapping was observed following an equivalent active hand-training but without a tool (Experiment 4). Taken together, our findings reveal that time processing is based on action-driven multiple representations. The dynamic nature of these representations is demonstrated by the remapping of time, which is action- and effector-dependent

Left hand, but not right hand, reaching is sensitive to visual context

Recently, it has been reported that grasping with the left hand is more vulnerable to visual size illusions than grasping with the right hand. The present study investigated whether this increased sensitivity of the left hand for visual context extends to reaching. Left- and right-handed participants reached for targets embedded in two different visual contexts with either left or right hands. Visual context was manipulated by presenting targets either in a blank field or within an array of placeholders marking possible target locations. Regardless of handedness, the presence of placeholders affected left hand, but not right hand, reaching by improving end-point accuracy and reducing movement speed. Furthermore, left hand reaching was more accurate for far than near targets, whereas right hand reaching showed the opposite pattern. We discuss two possible hemispheric lateralization accounts of these findings