Learned perceptual associations influence visuomotor programming under limited conditions: Cues as surface patterns

Experimental Brain Research

Volumn 147, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 473-484

  Haffenden, Angela M ^a   Goodale, Melvyn A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Action; Grasping; Perception; Vision; Visuomotor learning

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; COLOR; CONTROLLED STUDY; HAND; HAND GRIP; HUMAN; KINEMATICS; LEARNING; NORMAL HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TASK PERFORMANCE; TOUCH; VISION; VISUOMOTOR COORDINATION;

ASSOCIATION LEARNING; COLOR PERCEPTION; CUES; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SIZE PERCEPTION; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0036451697     PISSN: 00144819     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00221-002-1249-8     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Biederman I, Ju G (1988) Surface versus edge-based determinants of visual recognition. Cogn Psychol 20:38-64
2. Castiello U (1996) Grasping a fruit: selection for action. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 22:582-603
3. Gentilucci M, Benuzzi F, Bertolani L, Daprati E, Gangitano M (2000) Language and motor control. Exp Brain Res 133:468-490
4. Gentilucci M, Benuzzi F, Bertolani L, Gangitano M (2001) Influence of stimulus colour on the control of reaching-grasping movements. Exp Brain Res 137:36-44
5. Goodale MA, Milner AD (1992) Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends Neurosci 15:20-25
6. Gordon AM, Westling G, Cole KJ, Johansson RS (1993) Memory representations underlying motor commands used during manipulation of common and novel objects. J Neurophysiol 69:1789-1796
7. Haffenden AM, Goodale MA (2000) The effect of learned perceptual associations on visuomotor programming varies with kinematic demands. J Cogn Neurosci 12:950-964
8. Helson H (1964) Adaptation-level Theory. Harper and Row, New York
9. Humphrey GK, Goodale MA, Jakobson LS, Servos P (1994) The role of surface information in object recognition: Studies of a visual form agnosic and normal subjects. Perception 23:1457-1481
10. Humphreys GW, Riddoch MJ (2000) One more cup of coffee for the road: Object-action assemblies, response blocking and response capture after frontal lobe damage. Exp Brain Res 133:81-93
11. Jeannerod M, Decety J, Michel F (1994) Impairment of grasping movements following a bilateral posterior parietal lesion. Neuropsychologia 32:369-380
12. Jervis C, Bennett K, Thomas J, Lim S, Castiello U (1999) Semantic category interference effects upon the reach-to-grasp movement. Neuropsychologia 37:857-868
13. Lebedev MA, Douglass DK, Moody SL, Wise SP (2001) Prefrontal cortex neurons reflecting reports of a visual illusion. J Neurophysiol 85:1395-1411
14. Lhermitte F (1983) 'Utilization behaviour' and its relation to lesions of the frontal lobes. Brain 106:237-255
15. Milner AD, Goodale MA (1993) Visual pathways to perception and action. Prog Brain Res 95:317-337
16. Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9:97-113
17. Passingham RE, Toni I (2001) Contrasting the dorsal and ventral visual systems: Guidance of movement versus decision making. Neuroimage 14:S125-S131
18. Price CJ, Humphreys GW (1989) The effects of surface detail on object categorization and naming. Q J Exp Psychol 41A:797-828
19. Shiffrin RM, Dumais ST, Schneider W (1981) Characteristics of automatism. In: Long J, Baddeley A (eds) Attention and Performance IX. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 223-238
20. Toni I, Rushworth MFS, Passingham RE (2001) Neural correlates of visuomotor associations. Spatial rules compared with arbitrary rules. Exp Brain Res 141:359-369
21. Ungerleider LG, Mishkin M (1982) Two cortical visual systems. In: Ingle DJ, Goodale MA, Mansfield RJW (eds) Analysis of Visual Behavior. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 549-586