15 research outputs found
Fixation locations when grasping partly occluded objects
When grasping an object, subjects tend to look at the contact positions of the digits (A. M. Brouwer, V. H. Franz, D. Kerzel, & K. R. Gegenfurtner, 2005; R. S. Johansson, G. Westling, A. Bäckström, & J. R. Flanagan, 2001). However, these contact positions are not always visible due to occlusion. Subjects might look at occluded parts to determine the location of the contact positions based on extrapolated information. On the other hand, subjects might avoid looking at occluded parts since no object information can be gathered there. To find out where subjects fixate when grasping occluded objects, we let them grasp flat shapes with the index finger and thumb at predefined contact positions. Either the contact position of the thumb or the finger or both was occluded. In a control condition, a part of the object that does not involve the contact positions was occluded. The results showed that subjects did look at occluded object parts, suggesting that they used extrapolated object information for grasping. Additionally, they preferred to look in the direction of the index finger. When the contact position of the index finger was occluded, this tendency was inhibited. Thus, an occluder does not prevent fixations on occluded object parts, but it does affect fixation locations especially in conditions where the preferred fixation location is occluded. © ARVO
A Historiometric Examination of Machiavellianism and a New Taxonomy of Leadership
Although researchers have extensively examined the relationship between charismatic leadership and Machiavellianism (Deluga, 2001; Gardner & Avolio, 1995; House & Howell, 1992), there has been a lack of investigation of Machiavellianism in relation to alternative forms of outstanding leadership. Thus, the purpose of this investigation was to examine the relationship between Machiavellianism and a new taxonomy of outstanding leadership comprised of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders. Using an historiometric approach, raters assessed Machiavellianism via the communications of 120 outstanding leaders in organizations across the domains of business, political, military, and religious institutions. Academic biographies were used to assess twelve general performance measures as well as twelve general controls and five communication specific controls. The results indicated that differing levels of Machiavellianism is evidenced across the differing leader types as well as differing leader orientation. Additionally, Machiavellianism appears negatively related to performance, though less so when type and orientation are taken into account.Yeshttps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guideline
Manual size estimation: A neuropsychological measure of perception?
Manual size estimation (participants indicate the size of an
object with index finger and thumb) is often interpreted as
a measure of perceptual size information in the visual
system, as opposed to size information used by the motor
system in visually guided grasping. Because manual
estimation is a relatively new measure, we compared it to a
more traditional perceptual measure (method of
adjustment). Manual estimation showed larger effects of the
Ebbinghaus/Titchener illusion than the traditional
perceptual measure. This inconsistency can be resolved by
taking into account that manual estimation is also unusually
responsive to a physical variation of size. If we correct
for the effect of physical size, manual estimation and the
traditional perceptual measure show similar illusion
effects. Most interestingly, the corrected illusion effects
are also similar to the illusion effects found in
grasping. This suggests that the same neuronal signals which
generate the illusion in the traditional perceptual measure
are also responsible for the effects of the illusion on
manual estimation and on grasping
Grasp effects of the Ebbinghaus illusion: Obstacle-avoidance is not the explanation.
The perception-versus-action hypothesis
states that visual information is processed
in two different streams, one for visual
awareness (or perception) and one for motor
performance. Previous reports that the
Ebbinghaus illusion deceives perception but
not grasping seemed to indicate that this
dichotomy between perception and action was
fundamental enough to be reflected in the
overt behavior of non-neurological, healthy
humans. Contrary to this view we show that
the Ebbinghaus illusion affects grasping to
the same extent as perception. We also show
that the grasp effects cannot be accounted
for by non-perceptual obstacle avoidance
mechanisms as has recently been
suggested. Instead, even subtle variations of
the Ebbinghaus illusion affect grasping in
the same way as they affect perception. Our
results suggest that the same signals are
responsible for the perceptual effects and
for the motor effects of the Ebbinghaus
illusion. This casts doubt on one line of
evidence, which used to strongly favor the
perception-versus-action hypothesis
Differences in fixations between grasping and viewing objects
Where exactly do people look when they grasp an object? An object is usually contacted at two locations, whereas the gaze can only be at one location at the time. We investigated participants' fixation locations when they grasp objects with the contact positions of both index finger and thumb being visible and compared these to fixation locations when they only viewed the objects. Participants grasped with the index finger at the top and the thumb at the bottom of a flat shape. The main difference between grasping and viewing was that after a saccade roughly directed to the object's center of gravity, participants saccaded more upward and more into the direction of a region that was difficult to contact during grasping. A control experiment indicated that it was not the upper part of the shape that attracted fixation, while the results were consistent with an attraction by the index finger. Participants did not try to fixate both contact locations. Fixations were closer to the object's center of gravity in the viewing than in the grasping task. In conclusion, participants adapt their eye movements to the need of the task, such as acquiring information about regions with high required contact precision in grasping, even with small (graspable) objects. We suggest that in grasping, the main function of fixations is to acquire visual feedback of the approaching digits. © ARVO
Effects of Pointing Direction and Direction Predictability on Event-related Lateralizations of the EEG
In two experiments, we investigated
hemispheric electroencephalography (EEG)
differences in 9(12) healthy volunteers
during pointing to lateral and central
targets. The questions addressed were
whether horizontal pointing direction
and the predictability of pointing
direction modulated hemispheric
differences (event-related
lateralizations of the EEG = ERLs). To
vary pointing direction predictability,
targets were displayed either randomly
at one of nine different positions on a
screen (random) or at the same
horizontal position in five subsequent
trials (sequenced) while vertical
positions varied randomly. Event-related
lateralizations (ERLs) varied with
pointing direction. This was true across
changes in target eccentricity and
pointing distance. Foci of the ERLs were
in premotor and posterior parietal
cortex, which might reflect the critical
involvement of these areas in the
control of visually guided
reaching. Direction predictability
reduced the parietal and premotor ERL
before pointing onset, probably
reflecting a lesser effort in visuomotor
transformation. Predictability also
added an overlying N2pc component to the
early ERL after target onset and
increased direction effects during
movement
Planning movements well in advance
It has been suggested that the metrics of grasping movements directed to visible objects are controlled in real time and are therefore unaffected by previous experience. We tested whether the properties of a visually presented distractor object influence the kinematics of a subsequent grasping movement performed under full vision. After viewing an elliptical distractor object in one of two different orientations participants grasped a target object, which was either the same object with the same orientation or a circular object without obvious orientation. When grasping the circular target, grip orientation was influenced by the orientation of the distractor. Moreover, as in classical visuomotor priming, grasping movements were initiated faster when distractor and target were identical. Results provide evidence that planning of visually guided grasping movements is influenced by prior perceptual experience, challenging the notion that metric aspects of grasping are controlled exclusively on the basis of real-time information