4 research outputs found

    Eye–hand coupling is not the cause of manual return movements when searching

    Get PDF
    When searching for a target with eye movements, saccades are planned and initiated while the visual information is still being processed, so that subjects often make saccades away from the target and then have to make an additional return saccade. Presumably, the cost of the additional saccades is outweighed by the advantage of short fixations. We previously showed that when the cost of passing the target was increased, by having subjects manually move a window through which they could see the visual scene, subjects still passed the target and made return movements (with their hand). When moving a window in this manner, the eyes and hand follow the same path. To find out whether the hand still passes the target and then returns when eye and hand movements are uncoupled, we here compared moving a window across a scene with moving a scene behind a stationary window. We ensured that the required movement of the hand was identical in both conditions. Subjects found the target faster when moving the window across the scene than when moving the scene behind the window, but at the expense of making larger return movements. The relationship between the return movements and movement speed when comparing the two conditions was the same as the relationship between these two when comparing different window sizes. We conclude that the hand passing the target and then returning is not directly related to the eyes doing so, but rather that moving on before the information has been fully processed is a general principle of visuomotor control

    Combining eye and hand in search is suboptimal

    Get PDF
    When performing everyday tasks, we often move our eyes and hand together: we look where we are reaching in order to better guide the hand. This coordinated pattern with the eye leading the hand is presumably optimal behaviour. But eyes and hands can move to different locations if they are involved in different tasks. To find out whether this leads to optimal performance, we studied the combination of visual and haptic search. We asked ten participants to perform a combined visual and haptic search for a target that was present in both modalities and compared their search times to those on visual only and haptic only search tasks. Without distractors, search times were faster for visual search than for haptic search. With many visual distractors, search times were longer for visual than for haptic search. For the combined search, performance was poorer than the optimal strategy whereby each modality searched a different part of the display. The results are consistent with several alternative accounts, for instance with vision and touch searching independently at the same time
    corecore