Pro-active gaze control in squash

McKinney, Travis; Chajka, Kelly; Hayhoe, Mary

doi:10.1167/8.6.111

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study provides valuable new insights into the role of prediction in naturalistic control of gaze and hand movements, and builds upon a growing body of literature suggesting that, although predictive control strategies may not be readily apparent in the analysis of navigation or effector placement (Zhao & Warren 2014), predictive mechanisms are fundamentally involved in the control of eye movements in visually guided action in natural or naturalistic contexts Diaz, Cooper, Rothkopf, et al, 2013;Land & McLeod, 2000;Mann et al, 2013;McKinney, Chajka, & Hayhoe, 2008;Tuhkanen et al, 2019). What is less clear, however, is how predictive gaze control is related to predictive control strategies for controlling the effector (e.g., the paddle).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Movements of the eyes and hands are coordinated by a common predictive strategy

Binaee

Díaz

2019

Journal of Vision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although attempts to intercept a ball in flight are often preceded by predictive gaze behavior, the relationship between the predictive control of gaze and the effector is largely unexplored. The present study was designed to investigate the influence of the spatiotemporal demands of the task on a switch to the predictive control. Ten subjects immersed in a virtual environment attempted to intercept a ball that disappeared for 500 ms of its parabolic approach. The timing of the blank was varied through manipulation of the post-blank duration prior to the ball's arrival, and the shape of the trajectory was manipulated through variation of the pre-blank duration. Results reveal that the gaze movement trajectory during the blank was curvilinear, appropriately scaled to the curvature of the invisible moving ball, and the gaze vector was within 48 of the ball upon reappearance, despite 108 to 138 of ball movement. The timing of the blank did not influence the accuracy of predictive positioning of the paddle at the time of ball reappearance, indicated by the distance of the paddle relative to the ball's eventual passing location. However, analysis of trial-by-trial covariations revealed that, when the gaze vector more accurately predicted the ball's trajectory at reappearance, the paddle was also held closer to the ball's eventual passing location. This suggests that predictive strategies for paddle placement are more strongly mediated by the accuracy of gaze behavior than by the observed range of trajectories, or the timing of the blank.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Movements of the eyes and hands are coordinated by a common predictive strategy

Binaee

Díaz

2019

Journal of Vision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many studies of sports (which always involve only one ball) suggest that smoothpursuit eye movements are beneficial for extrapolation (along with controlled, saccadic eye movements), for example, in baseball, basketball, cricket, squash, volleyball, and table tennis (Bahill & LaRitz, 1984;Lee, 2010;Land & Furneaux, 1997;Land & McLeod, 2000;McKinney, Chajka, & Hayhoe 2008;Ripoll, Bard, & Paillard, 1986). Target-referenced eye movements are generally thought to be the starting point for effective extrapolation.…”

Section: Do Human Observers Extrapolate In Mot?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Why do people appear not to extrapolate trajectories during multiple object tracking? A computational investigation

Zhong

Wilson

et al. 2014

Journal of Vision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intuitively, extrapolating object trajectories should make visual tracking more accurate. This has proven to be true in many contexts that involve tracking a single item. But surprisingly, when tracking multiple identical items in what is known as "multiple object tracking," observers often appear to ignore direction of motion, relying instead on basic spatial memory. We investigated potential reasons for this behavior through probabilistic models that were endowed with perceptual limitations in the range of typical human observers, including noisy spatial perception. When we compared a model that weights its extrapolations relative to other sources of information about object position, and one that does not extrapolate at all, we found no reliable difference in performance, belying the intuition that extrapolation always benefits tracking. In follow-up experiments we found this to be true for a variety of models that weight observations and predictions in different ways; in some cases we even observed worse performance for models that use extrapolations compared to a model that does not at all. Ultimately, the best performing models either did not extrapolate, or extrapolated very conservatively, relying heavily on observations. These results illustrate the difficulty and attendant hazards of using noisy inputs to extrapolate the trajectories of multiple objects simultaneously in situations with targets and featurally confusable nontargets.

show abstract

“…In ball sports, athletes use a combination of saccadic and smooth pursuit eye movements to track a moving ball, for instance, in baseball (Bahill and LaRitz 1984), basketball (Ripoll et al 1986), cricket (Land and McLeod 2000), squash (McKinney et al 2008), volleyball (Lee 2010), and even in table tennis (Land and Furneaux 1997), where ball movement time is very short. Pursuing the ball increases an observer's dynamic visual acuity and therefore enables the use of cues, such as the ball's spin, as a source of information on the ball's movement trajectory (Bahill et al 2006).…”

Section: Effects Of Eye Movements On Motion Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%