Rapid eye movements to a virtual target are biased by illusory context in the Poggendorff figure.

In order to determine the influence of perceptual input upon oculomotor responses, we examined rapid saccadic eye movements made by healthy human observers to a virtual target defined by the extrapolated intersection of a pointer with a distant landing line. While corresponding perceptual judgments showed no evidence of systematic bias, eye movements showed a strong bias, in the direction of assimilation of the saccade trajectory to the shortest path between the end of the pointer and the landing line. Adding an abutting vertical inducing line to make an angle of 45 deg with the pointer led to a larger bias in the same direction as the classical Poggendorff illusion. This additional Poggendorff effect was similar in direction and magnitude for the eye movements and the perceptual responses. Latency and dynamics of the eye movements were closely similar to those recorded for a control task in which observers made a saccade from the start fixation to an explicit target on the landing line. Further experiments with inducing lines presented briefly at various times during the saccade latency period showed that the magnitude of the saccade bias was affected by inducer presentation during the saccade planning process, but not during the saccade itself. We conclude that the neural mechanisms for extrapolation can feed into the control of eye movements without obvious penalties in timing and accuracy and that this information can instantaneously modify motor response throughout the planning phase, suggesting close association between perceptual and motor mechanisms in the process of visuo-spatial extrapolation

Grasping isoluminant stimuli

We used a virtual reality setup to let participants grasp discs, which differed in luminance, chromaticity and size. Current theories on perception and action propose a division of labor in the brain into a color proficient perception pathway and a less color-capable action pathway. In this study, we addressed the question whether isoluminant stimuli, which provide only a chromatic but no luminance contrast for action planning, are harder to grasp than stimuli providing luminance contrast or both kinds of contrast. Although we found that grasps of isoluminant stimuli had a slightly steeper slope relating the maximum grip aperture to disc size, all other measures of grip quality were unaffected. Overall, our results do not support the view that isoluminance of stimulus and background impedes the planning of a grasping movement

Grasping trapezoidal objects

When grasping rectangular or circular objects with a precision grip the digits close in on the object in opposite directions. In doing so the digits move perpendicular to the local surface orientation as they approach opposite sides of the object. This perpendicular approach is advantageous for accurately placing the digits. Trapezoidal objects have non-parallel surfaces so that moving the digits in opposite directions would make the digits approach the contact surfaces at an angle that is not 90°. In this study we examined whether this happens, or whether subjects tend to approach trapezoidal objects’ surfaces perpendicularly. We used objects of different sizes and with different surface slants. Subjects tended to approach the object’s surfaces orthogonally, suggesting that they aim for an optimal precision of digit placement rather than simply closing their hand as it reaches the object

Locomotor Adaptation versus Perceptual Adaptation when Stepping Over an Obstacle with a Height Illusion

Background During locomotion, vision is used to perceive environmental obstacles that could potentially threaten stability; locomotor action is then modified to avoid these obstacles. Various factors such as lighting and texture can make these environmental obstacles appear larger or smaller than their actual size. It is unclear if gait is adapted based on the actual or perceived height of these environmental obstacles. The purposes of this study were to determine if visually guided action is scaled to visual perception, and to determine if task experience influenced how action is scaled to perception. Methodology/Principal Findings Participants judged the height of two obstacles before and after stepping over each of them 50 times. An illusion made obstacle one appear larger than obstacle two, even though they were identical in size. The influence of task experience was examined by comparing the perception-action relationship during the first five obstacle crossings (1–5) with the last five obstacle crossings (46–50). In the first set of trials, obstacle one was perceived to be 2.0 cm larger than obstacle two and subjects stepped 2.7 cm higher over obstacle one. After walking over the obstacle 50 times, the toe elevation was not different between obstacles, but obstacle one was still perceived as 2.4 cm larger. Conclusions/Significance There was evidence of locomotor adaptation, but no evidence of perceptual adaptation with experience. These findings add to research that demonstrates that while the motor system can be influenced by perception, it can also operate independent of perception

The effect of the “rod-and-frame” illusion on grip planning in a sequential object manipulation task

We investigated the effect of visual context (i.e., a visual illusion) on the planning of a sequential object manipulation task. Participants (n = 13) had to grasp a rod embedded in a “rod-and-frame” illusion and insert the rod-end into a tight hole in a pre-defined way. The grip type (defined by start posture, either pronated or supinated; and end posture, either comfortable or uncomfortable) used to grasp the rod was registered as a macroscopic variable of motor planning. Different rod orientations forced the participants to switch between grip types. As expected, most participants switched between pronated and supinated start postures, such that they ended the movement with a comfortable end posture. As it has been argued that planning is dependent on visual context information, we hypothesized that the visual illusion would affect the specific rod orientation at which participants would switch into a different grip type. This hypothesis was confirmed. More specifically, the illusion affected the critical spatial information that is used for action planning. Collectively, these findings are the first to show an effect of an illusion on motor planning in a sequential object manipulation task

Improved change detection with nearby hands

Recent studies have suggested altered visual processing for objects that are near the hands. We present three experiments that test whether an observer’s hands near the display facilitate change detection. While performing the task, observers placed both hands either near or away from the display. When their hands were near the display, change detection performance was more accurate and they held more items in visual short-term memory (experiment 1). Performance was equally improved for all regions across the entire display, suggesting a stronger attentional engagement over all visual stimuli regardless of their relative distances from the hands (experiment 2). Interestingly, when only one hand was placed near the display, we found no facilitation from the left hand and a weak facilitation from the right hand (experiment 3). Together, these data suggest that the right hand is the main source of facilitation, and both hands together produce a nonlinear boost in performance (superadditivity) that cannot be explained by either hand alone. In addition, the presence of the right hand biased observers to attend to the right hemifield first, resulting in a right-bias in change detection performance (experiments 2 and 3)

Similarities between digits’ movements in grasping, touching and pushing

In order to find out whether the movements of single digits are controlled in a special way when grasping, we compared the movements of the digits when grasping an object with their movements in comparable single-digit tasks: pushing or lightly tapping the same object at the same place. The movements of the digits in grasping were very similar to the movements in the single-digit tasks. To determine to what extent the hand transport and grip formation in grasping emerges from a synchronised motion of individual digits, we combined movements of finger and thumb in the single-digit tasks to obtain hypothetical transport and grip components. We found a larger peak grip aperture earlier in the movement for the single-digit tasks. The timing of peak grip aperture depended in the same way on its size for all tasks. Furthermore, the deviations from a straight line of the transport component differed considerably between subjects, but were remarkably similar across tasks. These results support the idea that grasping should be regarded as consisting of moving the digits, rather than transporting the hand and shaping the grip

Accurate Visuomotor Control below the Perceptual Threshold of Size Discrimination

Background: Human resolution for object size is typically determined by psychophysical methods that are based on conscious perception. In contrast, grasping of the same objects might be less conscious. It is suggested that grasping is mediated by mechanisms other than those mediating conscious perception. In this study, we compared the visual resolution for object size of the visuomotor and the perceptual system. Methodology/Principal Findings: In Experiment 1, participants discriminated the size of pairs of objects once through perceptual judgments and once by grasping movements toward the objects. Notably, the actual size differences were set below the Just Noticeable Difference (JND). We found that grasping trajectories reflected the actual size differences between the objects regardless of the JND. This pattern was observed even in trials in which the perceptual judgments were erroneous. The results of an additional control experiment showed that these findings were not confounded by task demands. Participants were not aware, therefore, that their size discrimination via grasp was veridical. Conclusions/Significance: We conclude that human resolution is not fully tapped by perceptually determined thresholds

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

No transfer of calibration between action and perception in learning a golf putting task

We assessed calibration of perception and action in the context of a golf putting task. Previous research has shown that right-handed novice golfers make rightward errors both in the perception of the perfect aiming line from the ball to the hole and in the putting action. Right-handed experts, however, produce accurate putting actions but tend to make leftward errors in perception. In two experiments, we examined whether these skill-related differences in directional error reflect transfer of calibration from action to perception. In the main experiment, three groups of right-handed novice participants followed a pretest, practice, posttest, retention test design. During the tests, directional error for the putting action and the perception of the perfect aiming line were determined. During practice, participants were provided only with verbal outcome feedback about directional error; one group trained perception and the second trained action, whereas the third group did not practice. Practice led to a relatively permanent annihilation of directional error, but these improvements in accuracy were specific to the trained task. Hence, no transfer of calibration occurred between perception and action. The findings are discussed within the two-visual-system model for perception and action, and implications for perceptual learning in action are raised