Functional relationships between grasp and transport components in a prehension task

Marteniuk, Ronald G.; Leavitt, Jack; MacKenzie, Christine L.; Athènes, Sylvie

doi:10.1016/0167-9457(90)90025-9

Cited by 269 publications

(198 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

173

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Figs. 1A and B present the hand aperture as a function of actual time to contact (i.e., the time until the end of the grasping movement), equivalent to the most familiar representation of hand apertures in prehension, and given in the majority of the studies of grasping and catching (e.g., in the context of prehension : Castiello, 2005;Jeannerod, 1984Jeannerod, , 1988Marteniuk, Leavitt, MacKenzie, & Athènes, 1990;Zaal et al, 1998; but see Bongers, Zaal, & Jeannerod, submitted; and in the context of catching: Mazyn, Savelsbergh, Montagne, & Lenoir, 2007;Savelsbergh, Whiting, & Bootsma, 1991;Savelsbergh, Whiting, Pijpers, & van Santvoord, 1993). In Figs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Getting hold of approaching objects: In search of a common control of hand-closure initiation in catching and grasping

Kamp¹,

Bongers²,

Zaal³

2010

Human Movement Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Getting hold of approaching objects: In search of a common control of hand-closure initiation in catching and grasping

Kamp¹,

Bongers²,

Zaal³

2010

Human Movement Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It has been suggested that modifications to the hand trajectory serve to maintain an acceptable level of impact between the hand and ball under the constraints imposed by the different conditions (Marteniuk et al 1990;Savelsbergh et al 1996). For example, adult participants exhibit a longer deceleration time when reaching and grasping a fragile object (light bulb) in order to avoid a harsh impact (Marteniuk et al 1990).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, adult participants exhibit a longer deceleration time when reaching and grasping a fragile object (light bulb) in order to avoid a harsh impact (Marteniuk et al 1990). It has also been reasoned that the contribution of additional degrees of freedom, such as the trunk, to reaching is influenced by the desired contact between the hand and object to be grasped (Steenbergen et al 1995).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coordinating degrees of freedom during interceptive actions in children

Ricken

Savelsbergh

Bennett³

2004

Experimental Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the experiment was to examine how children coordinate the degrees of freedom of the arm and trunk when performing interceptive actions that correspond to daily life activities. For that purpose, children were required to reach and grasp a stationary ball while standing (condition C1), a stationary ball while walking (C2), and a moving ball while standing (C3). The resulting movements were measured in world-centered and bodycentered coordinates, and then subjected to three-dimensional kinematic analysis. The different coordinate frames of reference were used to determine the interaction between arm and trunk movements. Children adapted their coordination in the two moving conditions (C2 and C3) by decelerating longer towards the ball and exhibiting more interaction between the arm and trunk movements than in the stationary condition (C1). These results indicate that, like adult participants, children adapt to the constraints imposed by complex, interceptive actions by recruiting additional degrees of freedom of the trunk, which are coordinated with the hand to produce a movement that preserves an appropriate level of impact at hand/object collision.

show abstract

“…Thus, the aperture width appeared to be modified in relation to the temporal characteristics of the transport component. When reach-to-grasp movements were performed under various transport durations or speeds, the maximum aperture occurred at a relatively fixed timing in relation to overall movement duration (Paulignan et al 1991a;Marteniuk et al 1990;Rand et al 2000;Smeets and Brenner 1999;Wallace and Weeks 1988;Wallace et al 1990). However, some other studies demonstrated that the duration for aperture closure movement was unaffected by different task conditions (Bootsma and van Wieringen 1992;Gentilucci et al 1992;Paulignan et al 1991b;Watson and Jakobson 1997;Zaal et al 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of speed manipulation on the control of aperture closure during reach-to-grasp movements

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates coordination between hand transport and grasp movement components by examining a hypothesis that the hand location, relative to the object, in which aperture closure is initiated remains relatively constant under a wide range of transport speed. Subjects made reach-tograsp movements to a dowel under four speed conditions: slow, comfortable, fast but comfortable, and maximum (i.e., as fast as possible). The distance traveled by the wrist after aperture reached its maximum (aperture closure distance) increased with an increase of transport speed across the speed conditions. This finding rejected the hypothesis and suggests that the speed of hand transport is taken into account in aperture closure initiation. Within each speed condition, however, the closure distance exhibited relatively small variability across trials, even though the total distance traveled by the wrist during the entire transport movement varied from trial to trial. The observed stability in aperture closure distance across trials implies that the hand distance to the object plays an important role in the control law governing the initiation of aperture closure. Further analysis showed that the aperture closure distance depended on the amplitude of peak aperture as well as hand velocity and acceleration. To clarify the form of the above control law, we analyzed four different mathematical models, in which a decision to initiate grasp closure is made as soon as a specific movement parameter (wrist distance to target or transport time) crosses a threshold that is either a constant value or a function of the above-mentioned other movement-related parameters. Statistical analysis performed across all movement conditions revealed that the control law model (according to which grasp initiation is made when hand distance to target becomes less than a certain linear function of aperture amplitude, hand velocity, and hand acceleration) produced significantly smaller residual errors than the other three models. The findings support the notion that transport-grasp coordination and grasp initiation is based predominantly on spatial characteristics of the arm movement, rather than movement timing.

show abstract

Functional relationships between grasp and transport components in a prehension task

Cited by 269 publications

References 17 publications

Getting hold of approaching objects: In search of a common control of hand-closure initiation in catching and grasping

Getting hold of approaching objects: In search of a common control of hand-closure initiation in catching and grasping

Coordinating degrees of freedom during interceptive actions in children

Effect of speed manipulation on the control of aperture closure during reach-to-grasp movements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About