The role of binocular vision in prehension movements performed in visually stimulating environments (original) (raw)

When two eyes are better than one in prehension: monocular viewing and end-point variance

Experimental Brain Research, 2004

Previous research has suggested that binocular vision plays an important role in prehension. It has been shown that removing binocular vision affects (negatively) both the planning and on-line control of prehension. It has been suggested that the adverse impact of removing binocular vision is because monocular viewing results in an underestimation of target distance in visuomotor tasks. This suggestion is based on the observation that the kinematics of prehension are altered when viewing monocularly. We argue that it is not possible to draw unambiguous conclusions regarding the accuracy of distance perception from these data. In experiment 1, we found data that contradict the idea that a consistent visuomotor underestimation of target distance is an inevitable consequence of monocular viewing. Our data did show, however, that positional variance increases under monocular viewing. We provide an alternative explanation for the kinematic changes found when binocular vision is removed. Our account is based on the changes in movement kinematics that occur when end-point variance is altered following the removal of binocular vision. We suggest that the removal of binocular vision leads to greater perceptual uncertainty (e.g. less precise stimulus cues), resulting in changes in the kinematics of the movement (longer duration movements). Our alternative account reconciles some differences within the research literature. We conducted a series of experiments to explore further the issue of when binocular information is advantageous in prehension. Three subsequent experiments were employed which varied binocular/monocular viewing in selectively lit conditions. Experiment 2 explored the differences in prehension measured between monocular and binocular viewing in a full cue environment with a continuous view of the target object. Experiment 3 required participants to reach, under a monocular or binocular view, for a continuously visible self-illuminated target object in an otherwise dark room. In Experiment 3, the participant could neither see the target object nor the reaching hand following initiation of the prehension movement. Our results suggest that binocular vision contributes to prehension by providing additional information (cues) to the nervous system. These cues appear to be weighted differentially according to the particular constellation of stimulus cues available to the participants when reaching to grasp. One constant advantage of a binocular view appears to be the provision of on-line information regarding the position of the hand relative to the target. In reduced cue conditions (i.e. where a view of the target object is lost following initiation of the movement), binocular information regarding target location appears to be particularly useful in the initial programming of reach distance. Our results are a step towards establishing the specific contributions that binocular vision makes to the control of prehension.

Reaching for virtual objects: binocular disparity and the control of prehension

Experimental Brain Research, 2003

Although, in principle, binocular cues provide veridical information about the three-dimensional shape of objects, our perception on the basis of these cues is distorted systematically. The consequences of these distortions may be less serious than they first appear, however, since in everyday life we rarely are required to judge the absolute shape, size or distance of objects. An important exception to this is in the control of prehension, where veridical information about an object to be grasped is required to plan the transport of the hand and to select the most appropriate grip. Here we investigate whether binocular cues provide accurate depth information for the control of prehension using disparity-defined, virtual objects and report that whilst binocular disparity can support prehensile movements, the kinematic indices, which reflect distance-reached and perceived size, show clear biases. These results suggest that accurate metric depth information for the control of prehension is not available from binocular cues in isolation.

Reaching for virtual objects: binocular disparity, retinal motion and the control of prehension

Arquivos Brasileiros De Oftalmologia, 2003

To reach for and grasp an object, its distance, shape and size must be known. In principle, the combination of disparity and motion information could be used to provide this information as the perception of object shape from disparity is biased and the perception of object size from motion is indeterminate. Here we investigate whether the visual system can take advantage of the simultaneous presence of both cues in the control of reaching and grasping. For both real and virtual objects, peak grip aperture scaled with object size and peak wrist velocity scaled with object distance. Kinematic indices, which reflect distance reached and perceived size, showed clear and systematic biases. These biases may be interpreted as arising from the biases in the use of binocular disparity, and the indeterminacy of the information provided by motion. Combining disparity and motion information improved estimates of the width, but not the depth or distance of objects. Overall, these results suggest that accurate metric depth information for the control of prehension is not available from binocular or motion cues, either in isolation or in combination.