Handedness is the clearest example of behavioral lateralization in humans. It is not known whether the obvious asymmetry manifested by hand preference is associated with similar asymmetry in brain activation during movement. We examined the functional activation in cortical motor areas during movement of the dominant and nondominant hand in groups of right-handed and left-handed subjects and found that use of the dominant hand was associated with a greater volume of activation in the contralateral motor cortex. Furthermore, there was a separate relation between the degree of handedness and the extent of functional lateralization in the motor cortex. The patterns of functional activation associated with the direction and degree of handedness suggest that these aspects are independent and are coded separately in the brain.

The oculomotor system has long been thought to rely on an accurate representation of eye displacement or position in a successful attempt to reconcile a stationary target's retinal instability (caused by motion of the eyes) with its corresponding spatial invariance. This is in stark contrast to perceptual localization, which has been shown to rely on a sluggish representation of eye displacement, achieving only partial compensation for the retinal displacement caused by saccadic eye movements. Recent studies, however, have begun to case doubt on the belief that the oculomotor system possess a signal of eye displacement superior to that of the perceptual system. To verify this, five humans and one monkey (Macaca nemestrina) served as subjects in this study of oculomotor localization abilities. Subjects were instructed to make eye movements, as accurately as possible, to the locations of three successive visual stimuli. Presentation of the third stimulus (2-ms duration) was timed so that it fell before, during, or after the subject's saccade from the first stimulus to the second. Localization errors in each subject (human and nonhuman) were consistent with the hypothesis that the oculomotor system has access to only a damped representation of eye displacement--a representation similar to that found in perceptual localization studies.

No abstract

We investigated the capacities of human subjects to intercept moving targets in a two-dimensional (2D) space. Subjects were instructed to intercept moving targets on a computer screen using a cursor controlled by an articulated 2D manipulandum. A target was presented in 1 of 18 combinations of three acceleration types (constant acceleration, constant deceleration, and constant velocity) and six target motion times, from 0.5 to 2.0 s. First, subjects held the cursor in a start zone located at the bottom of the screen along the vertical meridian. After a pseudorandom hold period, the target appeared in the lower left or right corner of the screen and traveled at 45 degrees toward an interception zone located on the vertical meridian 12.5 cm above the start zone. For a trial to be considered successful, the subject's cursor had to enter the interception zone within 100 ms of the target's arrival at the center of the interception zone and stay inside a slightly larger hold zone. Trials in which the cursor arrived more than 100 ms before the target were classified as "early errors," whereas trials in which the cursor arrived more than 100 ms after the target were classified as "late errors." Given the criteria above, the task proved to be difficult for the subjects. Only 41.3% (1080 out of 2614) of the movements were successful, whereas the remaining 58.7% were temporal (i.e., early or late) errors. A large majority of the early errors occurred in trials with decelerating targets, and their percentage tended to increase with longer target motion times. In contrast, late errors occurred in relation to all three target acceleration types, and their percentage tended to decrease with longer target motion times. Three models of movement initiation were investigated. First, the threshold-distance model, originally proposed for optokinetic eye movements to constant-velocity visual stimuli, maintains that response time is composed of two parts, a constant processing time and the time required for the stimulus to travel a threshold distance. This model only partially fit our data. Second, the threshold-tau model, originally proposed as a strategy for movement initiation, assumes that the subject uses the first-order estimate of time-to-contact (tau) to determine when to initiate the interception movement. Similar to the threshold distance model, the threshold-tau model only partially fit the data. Finally, a dual-strategy model was developed which allowed for the adoption of either of the two strategies for movement initiation; namely, a strategy based on the threshold-distance model ("reactive" strategy) and another based on the threshold-tau model ("predictive" strategy). This model provided a good fit to the data. In fact, individual subjects preferred to use one or the other strategy. This preference was allowed to be manifested at long target motion times, whereas shorter target motion times (i.e., 0.5 s and 0.8 s) forced the subjects to use only the reactive strategy.

Saccades were electrically evoked from the frontal eye field (FEF) of two trained monkeys while saccade-cells were recorded from the intermediate layers of the superior colliculus (SC). We found that FEF microstimulation, eliciting saccades of a given vector, excited SC saccade-cells encoding the same vector and inhibited all others. Such a mechanism can prevent competing commands from arising simultaneously in different structures.

A prominent and influential hypothesis of vision suggests the existence of two separate visual systems within the brain, one creating our perception of the world and another guiding our actions within it. The induced Roelofs effect has been described as providing strong evidence for this perception/action dissociation: When a small visual target is surrounded by a large frame positioned so that the frame's center is offset from the observer's midline, the perceived location of the target is shifted in the direction opposite the frame's offset. In spite of this perceptual mislocalization, however, the observer can accurately guide movements to the target location. Thus, perception is prone to the illusion while actions seem immune. Here we demonstrate that the Roelofs illusion is caused by a frame-induced transient distortion of the observer's apparent midline. We further demonstrate that actions guided to targets within this same distorted egocentric reference frame are fully expected to be accurate, since the errors of target localization will exactly cancel the errors of motor guidance. These findings provide a mechanistic explanation for the various perceptual and motor effects of the induced Roelofs illusion without requiring the existence of separate neural systems for perception and action. Given this, the behavioral dissociation that accompanies the Roelofs effect cannot be considered evidence of a dissociation of perception and action. This indicates a general need to re-evaluate the broad class of evidence purported to support this hypothesized dissociation.

Theoretically, the location of a visual target can be encoded with respect to the locations of other stimuli in the visual image (exocentric cues), or with respect to the observer (egocentric cues). Egocentric localization in the oculomotor system has been shown to rely on an internal representation of eye position that inaccurately encodes the time-course of saccadic eye movements, resulting in the mislocalization of visual targets presented near the time of a saccade. In the present investigation, subjects were instructed to localize perisaccadic stimuli in the presence or absence of a visual stimulus that could provide exocentric location information. Saccadic localization was more accurate in the presence of the exocentric cue, suggesting that localization is based on a combination of exocentric and egocentric cues. These findings indicate the need to reassess previously reported neurophysiological studies of spatial accuracy and current models of oculomotor control, which have focused almost exclusively on the egocentric localization abilities of the brain.

No abstract