Eye–Hand Coordination in Object Manipulation

Johansson, Roland S.; Westling, G.; Bäckström, Anders; Flanagan, J. Randall

doi:10.1523/jneurosci.21-17-06917.2001

Cited by 744 publications

(560 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

502

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Results obtained thus far indicate that, regardless of the target conditions, most subjects fixate the target's centre of mass around the time of movement onset, but direct their gaze towards the 'thumb side' of the object in the later feedback period just before contact. As also inferred from our present experiments, anchoring gaze on or near the thumb landing-site during grip closure could serve a dual purpose, both of which are improved by binocular vision compared to one eye alone (Servos and Goodale 1994;Watt and Bradshaw 2000;Melmoth and Grant 2006;Melmoth et al 2007;Anderson and Bingham 2010): to guide the thumb to a 'soft' and accurate contact (e.g., Johansson et al 2001) -a form of collision avoidance -at this site and to provide feedback about the narrowing thumb-object depth for on-line movement corrections preparatory to grip application.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

Getting a grip: different actions and visual guidance of the thumb and finger in precision grasping

Melmoth

Grant

2012

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the unspecified version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link AbstractWe manipulated the visual information available for grasping to examine what is visually guided when subjects get a precision grip on a common class of object (upright cylinders). In Experiment 1, objects (2 sizes) were placed at different eccentricities to vary the relative proximity to the participant's (n=6) body of their thumb and finger contact positions in the final grip orientations, with vision available throughout or only for movement programming.Thumb trajectories were straighter and less variable than finger paths, and the thumb normally made initial contact with the objects at a relatively invariant landing site, but consistent thumbfirst contacts were disrupted without visual guidance. Finger deviations were more affected by the object's properties and increased when vision was unavailable after movement onset. In Experiment 2, participants (n=12) grasped 'glow-in-the-dark' objects wearing different luminous gloves in which the whole hand was visible or the thumb or the index finger were selectively occluded. Grip closure times were prolonged and thumb-first contacts disrupted when subjects could not see their thumb, whereas occluding the finger resulted in wider grips at contact because this digit remained distant from the object. Results were together consistent with visual feedback guiding the thumb in the period just prior to contacting the object, with the finger more involved in opening the grip and avoiding collision with the opposite contact surface. As people can overtly fixate only one object contact-point at a time, we suggest that selecting one digit for on-line guidance represents an optimal strategy for initial grip placement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

Getting a grip: different actions and visual guidance of the thumb and finger in precision grasping

Melmoth

Grant

2012

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here again all 1058 trials without missing data are included. When performing everyday tasks our eyes are usually directed at the object or objects that are relevant for what we are doing at that moment Johansson et al 2001;Land et al 1999;Land and Hayhoe 2001;Triesch et al 2003), or toward positions at which critical information is expected to become available (e.g., information about how a ball bounces; Land and Furneaux 1997;Land and McLeod 2000). We could therefore tentatively conclude from Fig.…”

Section: Eye Movementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sources of variability in interceptive movements

Brenner

Smeets

2009

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to successfully intercept a moving target one must be at the right place at the right time. But simply being there is seldom enough. One usually needs to make contact in a certain manner, for instance to hit the target in a certain direction. How this is best achieved depends on the exact task, but to get an idea of what factors may limit performance we asked people to hit a moving virtual disk through a virtual goal, and analysed the spatial and temporal variability in the way in which they did so. We estimated that for our task the standard deviations in timing and spatial accuracy are about 20 ms and 5 mm. Additional variability arises from individual movements being planned slightly differently and being adjusted during execution. We argue that the way that our subjects moved was precisely tailored to the task demands, and that the movement accuracy is not only limited by the muscles and their activation, but also-and probably even mainlyby the resolution of visual perception.

show abstract

“…Similarly, different action intentions direct attention differently to object features for processing (e.g., Bekkering & Neggers, 2002;Fischer & Hoellen, 2004;Symes, Tucker, Ellis, Vainio, & Ottoboni, 2008). Eye movements during visually guided actions shed further light on the close relationship between vision, action and language (Land & Furneaux, 1997;Johansson, Westling, Bäckström, & Flanagan, 2001). For example when humans interact with objects, their eyes move ahead of their hands to support the on-line control of grasping (e.g., Bekkering & Neggers, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%