Where you look can influence haptic object recognition

We investigated whether the relative position of objects and the body would influence haptic recognition. People felt objects on the right or left side of their body midline, using their right hand. Their head was turned towards or away from the object, and they could not see their hands or the object. People were better at naming 2-D raised line drawings and 3-D small-scale models of objects and also real, everyday objects when they looked towards them. However, this head-towards benefit was reliable only when their right hand crossed their body midline to feel objects on their left side. Thus, haptic object recognition was influenced by people's head position, although vision of their hand and the object was blocked. This benefit of turning the head towards the object being explored suggests that proprioceptive and haptic inputs are remapped into an external coordinate system and that this remapping is harder when the body is in an unusual position (with the hand crossing the body midline and the head turned away from the hand). The results indicate that haptic processes align sensory inputs from the hand and head even though either hand-centered or object-centered coordinate systems should suffice for haptic object recognition.     

Visual line bisection in sinistrals and dextrals as a function of hemispace, hand, and scan direction

Visual line bisection was investigated in 26 sinistral and 24 dextral subjects as a function of hemispace, hand and scan direction. An ANOVA revealed significant main effects for hand preference, due to the mean bisection errors of dextral subjects being significantly leftward of those of sinistral subjects; for hand, due to the bisection errors of the left hand being significantly to the left of the right hand; and for scan, due to the bisection errors following a left scan being significantly to the left of a right scan. One significant interaction was found, that between hand and direction of scan, due to a significant difference between left and right hands following a scan from the left but not following a scan from the right. For dextral subjects the leftward bisection errors of the left and right hands following a scan from the left, but not for a scan from the right, differed significantly from the midpoint. For sinistral subjects the leftward bisection errors following a scan from the left and rightward bisection errors following a scan from the right differed significantly from the midpoint for the left hand but not for the right hand. No significant main effect or interactions for hemispace were found. This confirms that both sinistral and dextral subjects display pseudoneglect when using their preferred hand and scanning from the left. However, sinistrals, but not dextrals, will display reversed pseudoneglect when using their preferred hand and adopting a scan direction from the right. These results are discussed in terms of the interaction between three factors, whose influence can jointly and severally produce misbisections, hemispheric specialisation for visuospatial function, hemispheric activation for a manual response, and the allocation of visual attention.     

文字线索浏览方向、空间位置与移动光标对伪忽视的影响

采用线段平分任务,以无文字线索作为基线条件,考察文字线索的浏览方向、空间位置和移动光标对具有两种不同方向阅读经验的熟练双语者伪忽视的影响。结果发现,无文字线索条件下,光标从左往右方向移动时被试的判断偏向于线段中点的右侧,而从右往左移动时,偏向于线段中点的左侧。在有文字线索条件下发现,文字线索的浏览方向和空间位置的交互作用显著,简单效应检验显示文字线索的浏览方向和空间位置一致时伪忽视明显,不一致时伪忽视消失。结果表明,文字线索浏览方向、空间位置与移动光标能够影响伪忽视。伪忽视的存在和消失,不仅与眼球运动有关,还有与大脑两半球的激活水平有关。研究结果支持了视觉扫描假设和激活朝向假设。     

Manual asymmetries in the temporal and spatial control of aimed movements

Right-handed participants performed aimed, left- and right-hand movements toward a fixed target in speed and precision conditions. The purpose was to determine detailed hand differences in the temporal and spatial control during the course of a movement. The results showed that hand differences pertaining to spatial control of movement direction occurred throughout movement execution, and that these differences were stronger in the high speed and low precision conditions. Furthermore, the left hand took more time to execute a movement than the right hand, especially in conditions of low speed and high precision. Detailed time analysis revealed that slowing down of the left hand specifically happened prior to peak acceleration and beyond peak deceleration. These detailed temporal hand differences reoccurred as additional discontinuities in the acceleration profile. These results suggest that the left hand has more difficulty at movement start than the right hand, possibly in overcoming initial inertia. It is discussed whether time-based manual asymmetries located near the end of movement execution should be explained in terms of increased feedback use, or should be related to hand differences regarding the possible active dissipation of mechanical energy at movement completion.     

Lateral asymmetries of orientation to track control in extrapersonal space

In an initial experiment, subjects were asked to make simple lateral lever responses to left and right verbal and arrow directions with the preferred hand. No asymmetries were found. In two subsequent experiments, subjects guided a track through a left or right turn in one of four orientations under instructions which were direct, compass points, or physical referents, by either a rotary or a discrete control. Asymmetries of direction of turn were observed. Rotary control produced a response bias towards the body midline, but independently of this factor there was a powerful bias towards right turns of track direction in extrapersonal space. Discrimination in the horizontal plane was more difficult than in the vertical plane especially when the instructions were compass points. Within the horizontal plane, together with the bias to right turns of track direction, a bias towards the right of the display was present. The interaction of these factors is believed to underlie reported errors in route finding and direction giving situations.     

Visual exploration of reaching space during left and right arm movements in 6-month-old infants

Infant's manual laterality and eye-hand coordination emerge during the second part of the first year of life with the development of reaching. Nevertheless, little is known about the potential asymmetric characteristics of this coordination. The aim of this study was to describe visuo-spatial exploration in 6-month-old infants during reaching, according to the hand used. More specifically, we examined if the use of the left or the right hand was linked to a specific type of visual exploration. Gaze direction during goal-directed reaching towards an object placed on the table was measured with a remote ASL 504 eye tracker (Bedford MA). Twelve babies aged 6 months were observed during six reaching sessions, alterning three sessions with an object on the left side of the subject and three with an object on the right side. Gaze direction and some hand variables (hand activity, hand opening and hand position from the body) were coded with The Observer software. Results showed that babies visually explore their reaching space differently according to the hand used: they look more at the object when they use their right hand and more around the object when they use their left hand; they also look more often at their left hand than at their right one. These results suggest that an asymmetric visuo-manual coordination exists as early as 6 months: vision seems to support (1) left hand during reaching for evaluate distances from object to baby by means of visual feedbacks and (2) right hand for identify what sort of object is. Results are discussed in light of manual specialization and specific hemispheric skills at this age.     

An illusion of movement complementary to the horizontal-vertical illusion

Blindfolded subjects moved a stylus held in the hand over a standard distance of 4.5 ins. in a given direction. They then attempted to move the same distance in a direction at right angles to the first. Eight combinations of movements were investigated. The results reveal an illusion such that the extent of movements to left or right across the body is underestimated, while the extent of movements towards or away from the body in the mid-line is overestimated. The illusion applies to speed as well as extent of movement. Movement up or down in a vertical plane is equivalent to movement towards or away from the body in a horizontal plane.

The interaction of this illusion with the well-known horizontal-vertical illusion of visual perception explains a failure to find any net illusory effect where lines visually displayed in different orientations were matched for length by unseen movements in similar orientations.

Whether the visual and movement illusions simply co-exist or whether they are functionally related is not yet clear.     

Working memory for movements

Movement to spatial targets that can, in principle, be carried out by more than one effector can be distinguished from movements that involve specific configurations of body parts. The experiments reported here investigate memory span for a series of hand configurations and memory span for a series of hand movements to spatial locations. Spans were produced normally, or in conditions in which a suppression task was carried out on the right or the left hand while the movements to be remembered were presented. All movements were recalled using the right hand. There were two suppression tasks. One involved repeatedly squeezing a tube and so changing the configuration of the hand, and the other involved tapping a repeated series of spatial targets. The spatial tapping task interfered with span for spatial locations when it was presented on either the right or the left hand but did not affect span for movement pattern. The movement suppression task interfered with memory for movement pattern when it was presented on either the right or the left hand, but did not interfere with span for spatial locations. It is concluded that memory for movement configurations involves different processes from those used in spatial tasks and that there may be a need for a subsystem of working memory that is specific for movement configuration.     

Saccadic eye movements and dual-task interference

Four dual-task experiments required a speeded manual choice response to a tone in a close temporal proximity to a saccadic eye movement task. In Experiment 1, subjects made a saccade towards a single transient; in Experiment 2, a red and a green colour patch were presented to left and right, and the saccade was to which ever patch was the pre-specified target colour. There was some slowing of the eye movement, but neither task combination showed typical dual-task interference (the “psychological refractory effect”). However, more interference was observed when the direction of the saccade depended on whether a central colour patch was red or green, or when the saccade was directed towards the numerically higher of two large digits presented to the left and the right. Experiment 5 examined a vocal second task, for comparison. The findings might reflect the fact that eye movements can be directed by two separate brain systems--the superior colliculus and the frontal eye fields; commands from the latter but not the former may be delayed by simultaneous unrelated sensorimotor tasks.     

S-R compatibilities depend on eccentricity of responding hand

Bauer and Miller (1982) demonstrated that when responding on the body midline with the right hand, subjects react faster when the pairing between horizontally oriented stimuli (an X to the left or right of fixation) and vertically oriented responses (an up or down finger movement) is left-down, right-up (“anti-clockwise”) but when responding with the left hand, the converse pairing was faster. The present experiments tested whether those preferences held for responses other than on the body midline. Unimanual reaction times for clockwise and anti-clockwise S-R pairings were determined for both hands at the midline and 30 and 60 cm to the left or right. Hand position determined both the direction and extent of the compatibility preference; at eccentric positions the right hand preferred clockwise pairings and the left anticlockwise, the converse of that found by Bauer and Miller. The results extend Bauer and Miller's finding, raise problems for theories of S-R compatibility, and further reveal that the state of the action system “sets up” perception.     

Eye-hand coordination asymmetries in manual aiming

The authors investigated whether movement-planning and feedback-processing abilities associated with the 2 hand-hemisphere systems mediate illusion-induced biases in manual aiming and saccadic eye movements. Although participants' (N = 23) eye movements were biased in the direction expected on the basis of a typical Müller-Lyer configuration, hand movements were unaffected. Most interesting, both left- and right-handers' eye fixation onset and time to hand peak velocity were earlier when they aimed with the left hand than they were when they aimed with the right hand, regardless of the availability of vision for online movement control. They thus adapted their eye-hand coordination pattern to accommodate functional asymmetries. The authors suggest that individuals apply different movement strategies according to the abilities of the hand and the hemisphere system used to produce the same outcome.     

利手与内隐左右空间情感效价关系的眼动研究

为探明手动作流畅性和情感材料呈现空间在不同利手者左右空间情感偏好中的关系,本研究将情绪Stroop范式和眼动测量相结合,通过反应速度和眼动数据将动作流畅性和空间情感注意偏向相分离,并考察其交互作用。结果发现右利手个体的反应速度存在优势手效应,不同利手者在使用左手时表现出对优势手同侧空间的内隐情感偏好,表明右利手个体的反应速度存在优势手流畅性的主导作用,手动作流畅性和内隐空间情感偏好的作用可以分离。     

Dissociating cognitive and motor interference effects on kinesthetic short-term memory

In two experiments, we investigated how short-term memory of kinesthetically defined spatial locations suffers from either motor or cognitive distraction. In Exp. 1, 22 blindfolded participants moved a handle with their right hand towards a mechanical stop and back to the start and then reproduced the encoded stop position by a second movement. The retention interval was adjusted to approximately 0 and 8 s. In half of the trials participants had to provide a verbal judgment of the target distance after encoding (cognitive distractor). Analyses of constant and variable errors indicated that the verbal judgments interfered with the motor reproduction only, when the retention interval was long. In Exp. 2, 22 other participants performed the same task but instead of providing verbal distance estimations they performed an additional movement either with their right or left hand during the retention interval. Constant error was affected by the side of the interpolated movement (right vs. left hand) and by the delay interval. The results show that reproduction of kinesthetically encoded spatial locations is affected differently in long- and short-retention intervals by cognitive and motor interference. This suggests that reproduction behavior is based on distinct codes during immediate vs. delayed recall.     

Kinematic Analyses of Manual Asymmetries in Visual Aiming Movements

The right hand advantage has been thought to arise from the greater efficiency of the right hand/left hemisphere system in processing visual feedback information. This hypothesis was examined using kinematic analyses of aiming performance, focusing particularly on time after peak velocity which has been shown to be sensitive to visual feedback processing demands. Eight right-handed subjects pointed at two targets with their left and right hands with or without vision available and either as accurately or as fast as possible. Pointing errors and movement time were found to be smaller with the right hand. Analyses of the temporal componenets of movement time revealed that the hands differed only in time after peak velocity (in deceleration), with the right hand spending significantly less time. This advantage for the right hand, however, was apparent whether or not vision was available and only when accuracy was emphasized in performance. These findings suggest that the right hand system may be more efficient at processing feedback information whether this be visual or nonvisual (e.g., proprioceptive).     

Evidence for cerebral asymmetries in a finger sequencing task

Visual input was lateralized using a specially designed contact lens system. Subjects performed a sequence of two keypresses in response to a light stimulus with either the left or the right hand in a choice reaction time paradigm. Two choice reaction time conditions were used: (A) hand certainty, sequence uncertainty and (B) hand uncertainty, sequence certainty. Reaction time (RT) results indicate that there are no significant differences between the left and right hemisphere in selecting a sequential response in either of the two conditions. Interfinger time (IFT) results show a relative left eye (right hemisphere)-left hand advantage when there was hand certainty, sequence uncertainty and a relative left eye (right hemisphere) disadvantage for both hands when there was hand uncertainty, sequence certainty. The RT results do not support the concept of a center in the left hemisphere for selection of the components of a two-element sequential keypress, prior to movement initiation. However, the IFT results indicate that there are differences in the processing ability of the left and right hemispheres in a sequencing task, after movement initiation.     

Manual asymmetries in the preparation and control of goal-directed movements

The primary purpose of this experiment was to determine if left hand reaction time advantages in manual aiming result from a right hemisphere attentional advantage or an early right hemisphere role in movement preparation. Right-handed participants were required to either make rapid goal-directed movements to small targets or simply lift their hand upon target illumination. The amount of advance information about the target for a particular trial was manipulated by precuing a subset of potential targets prior to the reaction time interval. When participants were required to make aiming movements to targets in left space, the left hand enjoyed a reaction advantage that was not present for aiming in right space or simple finger lifts. This advantage was independent of the amount or type of advance information provided by the precue. This finding supports the movement planning hypothesis. With respect to movement execution, participants completed their aiming movements more quickly when aiming with their right hand, particularly in right space. This right hand advantage in right space was due to the time required to decelerate the movement and to make feedback-based adjustments late in the movement trajectory.     

Is there manual asymmetry in movement preparation?

Manual asymmetry in response preparation was investigated in simple and complex movements by using simple reaction-time tasks. The simple movement consisted of lifting the index finger, while in the complex one subjects reversed direction of movement to hit a switch after reaching for and grasping a tennis ball. Analysis showed that performance with either the right or the left hand was equivalent, with longer latencies for reacting on the complex task in comparison to the simple one. These findings indicate similar capabilities of the right and the left cerebral hemispheres to prepare the motor system for action independently of the spatial requirements of movement.     

Two hands are better than one: a new assessment method and a new interpretation of the non-visual illusion of self-touch

A simple experimental paradigm creates the powerful illusion that one is touching one’s own hand even when the two hands are separated by 15 cm. The participant uses her right hand to administer stimulation to a prosthetic hand while the Examiner provides identical stimulation to the participant’s receptive left hand. Change in felt position of the receptive hand toward the prosthetic hand has previously led to the interpretation that the participant experiences self-touch at the location of the prosthetic hand, and experiences a sense of ownership of the prosthetic hand. Our results argue against this interpretation. We assessed change in felt position of the participant’s receptive hand but we also assessed change in felt position of the participant’s administering hand. Change in felt position of the administering hand was significantly greater than change in felt position of the receptive hand. Implications for theories of ownership are discussed.     

Eye movements and performance during bilateral tracing tasks

To examine the role of current visual monitoring in the between-hand differences in skilled movements, eye movements and errors during bilateral tracing tasks were analyzed in 10 subjects. When subjects traced a horizontal course abductively with both hands, the subject's gaze followed the movement of the right hand, and more errors were observed on the left hand. When subjects traced a vertical course, where fine motor control for alteration of movement direction was necessary, more errors were shown on the left hand despite the alternate visual scan of the two hands. The results were interpreted as showing that the between-hand differences in skilled movements are primarily due to the left hand's poor ability in motor output, and that the differential efficiency in the use of visual monitoring becomes an important factor in the between-hand differences when symmetrical movements of both hands with a low degree of difficulty are required.     

Does hand dominance affect the use of motor abundance when reaching to uncertain targets?

This study investigated hemispheric differences in utilizing motor abundance to achieve flexible patterns of joint coordination when reaching to uncertain target locations. Right-handed participants reached with each arm to the same central target when its final location was certain or when there was a 66% probability that its location could change after movement initiation. Use of greater motor abundance was observed when participants reached to the central target under target location uncertainty regardless of the arm used to reach. Joint variance associated with variability of movement direction was larger when reaching with the left, non-dominant arm. This arm also exhibited higher hand path variability compared to the dominant arm. These arm differences were not found when the final (central) target location was known in advance. The results provide preliminary evidence for a greater ability of the dominant (right) arm/left hemisphere to decouple directions in joint space. That is, to increase the use of motor abundance without simultaneously inducing unwanted hand path variability requires that joint variations be restricted to a limited subspace of joint space. Hemispheric differences in motor planning did not appear to account for arm differences related to the use of motor abundance.