The effects of abrupt onset of 2-D and 3-D distractors on prehension movements

Castiello, Umberto

doi:10.3758/bf03194520

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with this idea, Holmes and Heath (2013) reported that although the size of real objects and images could be estimated equally well, observers used different grip strategies during grasping of real objects and images. Analogous findings were also reported by Castiello (1998Castiello ( , 2001 who found that real 'distractor' objects (but not photographs of the same items) interfered with the kinematics of reaching and grasping responses. Snow et al (2011) found different neuroimaging effects of repetitions for real objects versus matched photographs of the same items, suggesting that the human brain may process and/or represent real graspable objects differently from pictures.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Priming tool actions: Are real objects more effective primes than pictures?

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans are faster to grasp an object such as a tool if they have previewed the same object beforehand. This priming effect is strongest when actors gesture the use of the tool rather than simply move it, possibly because the previewed tool activates action-specific routines in dorsal-stream motor networks. Here, we examined whether real tools, which observers could physically act upon, serve as more potent primes than two-dimensional images of tools, which do not afford physical action. Participants were presented with a prime stimulus that could be either a real tool or a visually matched photograph of a tool. After a brief delay, participants interacted with a real tool target, either by 'grasping to move,' or 'grasping to use' it. The identities of the prime and target tools were either the same (congruent trials; e.g., spatula-spatula) or different (incongruent trials; e.g., whisk-spatula). As expected, participants were faster to initiate grasps during trials when they had to move the tool rather than gesture its use. Priming effects were observed for grasp-to-use, but not grasp-to-move, responses. Surprisingly, however, both pictures of tools and real tools primed action responses equally. Our results indicate that tool priming effects are driven by pictorial cues and their implied actions, even in the absence of volumetric cues that reflect the tangibility and affordances of the prime.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Priming tool actions: Are real objects more effective primes than pictures?

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consistent with previous reports, arm trajectories changed their shape when targets of different size were used, and this effect was chiefly due to modifications in the deceleration phase (MacKenzie et al ., ; Gentilucci et al ., ; Castiello, ). Fitt's law (1954) was found to apply, given that movement time increased as a function of task difficulty.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Object size modulates fronto‐parietal activity during reaching movements

Tarantino

Sanctis

Straulino

et al. 2014

Eur J of Neuroscience

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In both monkeys and humans, reaching-related sensorimotor transformations involve the activation of a wide fronto-parietal network. Recent neurophysiological evidence suggests that some components of this network host not only neurons encoding the direction of arm reaching movements, but also neurons whose involvement is modulated by the intrinsic features of an object (e.g. size and shape). To date, it has yet to be investigated whether a similar modulation is evident in the human reaching-related areas. To fill this gap, we asked participants to reach towards either a small or a large object while kinematic and electroencephalographic signals were recorded. Behavioral results showed that the precision requirements were taken into account and the kinematics of reaching was modulated depending on the object size. Similarly, reaching-related neural activity at the level of the posterior parietal and premotor cortices was modulated by the level of accuracy determined by object size. We therefore conclude that object size is engaged in the neural computations for reach planning and execution, consistent with the results from physiological studies in non-human primates.

show abstract

“…This is a puzzling result given that evidence in humans indicates that the kinematical organization of reaching is affected by the precision requirements related to intrinsic features of objects such as size (MacKenzie et al, 1987; Gentilucci et al, 1991; Castiello, 2001). In this perspective we would have expected increased AIP activity as a reflection of the need for more on-line control required by reaching small objects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An investigation of the neural circuits underlying reaching and reach-to-grasp movements: from planning to execution

Begliomini

Sanctis

Marangon

et al. 2014

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Experimental evidence suggests the existence of a sophisticated brain circuit specifically dedicated to reach-to-grasp planning and execution, both in human and non-human primates (Castiello, 2005). Studies accomplished by means of neuroimaging techniques suggest the hypothesis of a dichotomy between a “reach-to-grasp” circuit, involving the anterior intraparietal area, the dorsal and ventral premotor cortices (PMd and PMv – Castiello and Begliomini, 2008; Filimon, 2010) and a “reaching” circuit involving the medial intraparietal area and the superior parieto-occipital cortex (Culham et al., 2006). However, the time course characterizing the involvement of these regions during the planning and execution of these two types of movements has yet to be delineated. A functional magnetic resonance imaging study has been conducted, including reach-to-grasp and reaching only movements, performed toward either a small or a large stimulus, and Finite Impulse Response model (Henson, 2003) was adopted to monitor activation patterns from stimulus onset for a time window of 10 s duration. Data analysis focused on brain regions belonging either to the reaching or to the grasping network, as suggested by Castiello and Begliomini (2008). Results suggest that reaching and grasping movements planning and execution might share a common brain network, providing further confirmation to the idea that the neural underpinnings of reaching and grasping may overlap in both spatial and temporal terms (Verhagen et al., 2013). But, although responsive for both actions, they show a significant predominance for either one of the two actions and such a preference is evident on a temporal scale.

show abstract

The effects of abrupt onset of 2-D and 3-D distractors on prehension movements

Cited by 16 publications

References 39 publications

Priming tool actions: Are real objects more effective primes than pictures?

Priming tool actions: Are real objects more effective primes than pictures?

Object size modulates fronto‐parietal activity during reaching movements

An investigation of the neural circuits underlying reaching and reach-to-grasp movements: from planning to execution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About