Visuomotor robustness is based on integration not segregation

Vision Research

Volumn 50, Issue 24, 2010, Pages 2627-2632

  Schenk, Thomas ^a  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cue reliability; Dorsal ventral; Perception action; Sensorimotor control; Visual form agnosia

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ASSOCIATION; BRAIN DAMAGE; HUMAN; KINEMATICS; MOTOR CONTROL; MOTOR DYSFUNCTION; PERCEPTION DISORDER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SENSORIMOTOR FUNCTION; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISION; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUOMOTOR COORDINATION;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; HUMANS; MOVEMENT; NEURAL PATHWAYS; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 78650225110     PISSN: 00426989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2010.08.013     Document Type: Review

References (76)

1. Aglioti S., Desouza J.F.X., Goodale M.A. Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Current Biology 1995, 5:679-685.
2. Alexander G.E., Delong M.R., Crutcher M.D. Do cortical and basal ganglionic motor areas use motor programs to control movement. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1992, 15:656-665.
3. Bridgeman B., Lewis S., Heit G., Nagle M. Relation between cognitive and motor-oriented systems of visual position perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1979, 5:692-700.
4. Bruno N., Bernardis P., Gentilucci M. Visually guided pointing, the Muller-Lyer illusion, and the functional interpretation of the dorsal-ventral split: Conclusions from 33 independent studies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 2008, 32:423-437.
5. Bruno N., Franz V.H. When is grasping affected by the Muller-Lyer illusion? A quantitative review. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47:1421-1433.
6. Byrne P.A., Crawford J.D. Cue reliability and a landmark stability heuristic determine relative weighting between egocentric and allocentric visual information in memory-guided reach. Journal of Neurophysiology 2010, 103:3054-3069.
7. Carey D.P., Dijkerman H.C., Milner A.D. Perception and action in depth. Consciousness and Cognition 1998, 7:438-453.
8. Carey D.P., Harvey M., Milner A.D. Visuomotor sensitivity for shape and orientation in a patient with visual form agnosia. Neuropsychologia 1996, 34:329-337.
9. Cavina-Pratesi C., Goodale M.A., Culham J.C. FMRI reveals a dissociation between grasping and perceiving the size of real 3D objects. Plos One 2007, 2:59.
10. Crawford J.R., Garthwaite P.H. Evaluation of criteria for classical dissociations in single-case studies by Monte Carlo simulation. Neuropsychology 2005, 19:664-678.
11. Crawford J.R., Garthwaite P.H. Detecting dissociations in single-case studies: Type I errors, statistical power and the classical versus strong distinction. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44:2249-2258.
12. Culham J.C., Gallivan J., Cavina-Pratesi C., Quinlan D.J. FMRI Investigations of reaching and ego space in human superior parieto-occipital cortex. Embodiment, ego-space, and action (carnegie mellon symposia on cognition series) 2008, 247-266. Psychology Press, New York, US. R.L. Klatzky, B. MacWhinney, B. Behrmann (Eds.).
13. Culham J.C., Valyear K.F. Human parietal cortex in action. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2006, 16:205-212.
14. de Grave D.D.J., Bruno N. The effect of the Muller-Lyer illusion on saccades is modulated by spatial predictability and saccadic latency. Experimental Brain Research 2010, 203:671-679.
15. De'Sperati C., Baud-Bovy G. Blind saccades: An asynchrony between seeing and looking. Journal of Neuroscience 2008, 28:4317-4321.
16. Diedrichsen J., Shadmehr R., Ivry R.B. The coordination of movement: Optimal feedback control and beyond. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2009, 14:31-39.
17. Dijkerman H.C., McIntosh R.D., Schindler I., Nijboer T.C.W., Milner A.D. Choosing between alternative wrist postures: Action planning needs perception. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47:1476-1482.
18. Dijkerman H.C., Milner A.D., Carey D.P. The perception and prehension of objects oriented in the depth plane. I. Effects of visual form agnosia. Experimental Brain Research 1996, 112:442-451.
19. Dijkerman H.C., Milner A.D., Carey D.P. Motion parallax enables depth processing for action in a visual form agnosic when binocular vision is unavailable. Neuropsychologia 1999, 37:1505-1510.
20. Ernst M.O., Banks M.S. Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 2002, 415:429-433.
21. Ernst M.O., Buelthoff H.H. Merging the senses into a robust percept. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2004, 8:162-169.
22. Franz V.H. Action does not resist visual illusions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2001, 5:457-459.
23. Franz V., Gegenfurtner K. Grasping visual illusions: Consistent data and no dissociation. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2008, 25:920-950.
24. Franz V.H., Hesse C., Kollath S. Visual illusions, delayed grasping, and memory: No shift from dorsal to ventral control. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47:1518-1531.
25. Geisler W.S., Kersten D. Illusions, perception and Bayes. Nature Neuroscience 2002, 5:508-510.
26. Georgopoulos A.P., Ashe J. One motor cortex, two different views. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3:963.
27. Georgopoulos A.P., Kalaska J.F., Caminiti R., Massey J.T. On the relations between the direction of two-dimensional arm movements and cell discharge in primate motor cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 1982, 2:1527-1537.
28. Glickstein M., Stein J. Paradoxical movement in Parkinson's disease. Trends in Neuroscience 1991, 14:480-482.
29. Goodale M.A., Jakobson L.S., Keillor J.M. Differences in the visual control of pantomimed and natural grasping movements. Neuropsychologia 1994, 32:1159-1178.
30. Goodale M.A., Jakobson L.S., Milner A.D., Perrett D.I., Benson P.J., Hietanen J.K. The nature and limits of orientation and pattern processing supporting visuomotor control in a visual form agnosic. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1994, 6:46-56.
31. Goodale M.A., Meenan J.P., Buelthoff H.H., Nicolle D.A., Murphy K.J., Racicot C.I. Separate neural pathways for the visual analysis of object shape in perception and prehension. Current Biology 1994, 4:604-610.
32. Goodale M.A., Milner A.D. Two visual streams: Interconnections do not imply duplication of function. Cognitive Neuroscience 2010, 1:64-66.
33. Goodale M.A., Milner A.D., Jakobson L.S., Carey D.P. A neurological dissociation between perceiving objects and grasping them. Nature 1991, 349:154-156.
34. Greenwald H.S., Knill D.C., Saunders J.A. Integrating visual cues for motor control: A matter of time. Vision Research 2005, 45:1975-1989.
35. Hartung B., Schrater P.R., Buelthoff H.H., Kersten D., Franz V.H. Is prior knowledge of object geometry used in visually guided reaching?. Journal of Vision 2005, 5:504-514.
36. Hesse C., Franz V.H. Memory mechanisms in grasping. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47:1532-1545.
37. Hoff B., Arbib M.A. Models of trajectory formation and temporal interaction of reach and grasp. Journal of Motor Behavior 1993, 25:175-192.
38. James T.W., Culham J., Humphrey G.K., Milner A.D., Goodale M.A. Ventral occipital lesions impair object recognition but not object-directed grasping: An fMRI study. Brain 2003, 126:2463-2475.
39. Karnath H.O., Ruter J., Mandler A., Himmelbach M. The anatomy of object recognition-visual form agnosia caused by medial occipitotemporal stroke. Journal of Neuroscience 2009, 9:5854-5862.
40. Mamassian P., Landy M.S. Interaction of visual prior constriants. Vision Research 2001, 41:2653-2668.
41. Landy M.S., Maloney L.T., Johnston E.B., Young M. Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination - In defense of weak Fusion. Vision Research 1995, 35:389-412.
42. Majsak M.J., Kaminski T., Gentile A.M., Flanagan J.R. The reaching movements of patients with Parkinson's disease under self-determined maximal speed and visually cued conditions. Brain 1998, 121:755-766.
43. Marotta J.J., Behrmann M., Goodale M.A. The removal of binocular cues disrupts the calibration of grasping in patients with visual form agnosia. Experimental Brain Research 1997, 116:113-121.
44. McIntosh R.D., Lashley G. Matching boxes: Familiar size influences action programming. Neuropsychologia 2008, 46:2441-2444.
45. Milner A.D., Goodale M.A. The visual brain in action 1995, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
46. Milner A.D., Goodale M.A. The visual brain in action 2006, Oxford University Press, Oxford. 2nd ed.
47. Milner A.D., Goodale M.A. Two visual systems re-viewed. Neuropsychologia 2008, 46:774-785.
48. Milner A.D., Perrett D.I., Johnston R.S., Benson P.J., Jordan T.R., Heeley D.W., et al. Perception and action in 'visual form agnosia'. Brain 1991, 114:405-428.
49. Mon-Williams M., McIntosh R.D., Milner A.D. Vertical gaze angle as a distance cue for programming reaching: insights from visual form agnosia II (of III). Experimental Brain Research 2001, 139:137-142.
50. Mon-Williams M., Tresilian J.R., McIntosh R.D., Milner A.D. Monocular and binocular distance cues: insights from visual form agnosia I (of III). Experimental Brain Research 2001, 139:127-136.
51. Moran D.W., Schwartz A.B. One motor cortex, two different views. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3:963.
52. Murray S.O., Boyaci H., Kersten D. The representation of perceived angular size in human primary visual cortex. Nature Neuroscience 2006, 9:429-434.
53. Plamondon R., Stelmach G.E., Teasdale N. Motor program coding representation from a handwriting generator model - The production of line responses. Biological Cybernetics 1990, 63:443-451.
54. Rice-Cohen N., Cross E.S., Tunik E., Grafton S.T., Culham J.C. Ventral and dorsal stream contributions to the online control of immediate and delayed grasping: A TMS approach. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47:1553-1562.
55. Rossit S., Szymanek L., Butler S.H., Harvey M. Memory-guided saccade processing in visual form agnosia (patient DF). Experimental Brain Research 2010, 200:109-116.
56. Schenk T., Baur B., Steude U., Boetzel K. Effects of deep brain stimulation on prehensile movements in PD patients are less pronounced when external timing cues are provided. Neuropsychologia 2003, 41:783-794.
57. Schenk T., Mai N. Time constraints improve reaching movements in an ataxic patient. Experimental Brain Research 1999, 120:214-218.
58. Schenk T., McIntosh R.D. Do we have independent visual streams for perception and action?. Cognitive Neuroscience 2010, 1:52-63.
59. Schmidt R.A. Schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological Review 1975, 82:225-260.
60. Schrater P.R., Kersten D. How optimal depth cue integration depends on the task. International Journal of Computer Vision 2000, 40:73-91.
61. Scott S.H. One motor cortex, two different views - Reply. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3(10):964-965.
62. Scott S.H. Population vectors and motor cortex: Neural coding or epiphenomenon?. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3:307-308.
63. Shaffer L.H. Motor programming and control. Tutorials in motor behavior II 1992, 181-194. North-Holland, Amsterdam. G.E. Stelmach, J. Requin (Eds.).
64. Smeets J.B.J., Brenner E. A new view on grasping. Motor Control 1999, 3:237-271.
65. Smeets J.B.J., Brenner E. 10 Years of Illusions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2006, 32:1501-1504.
66. Smeets J.B.J., Brenner E., de Grave D.D.J., Cujpers R.H. Illusions in action: Consequences of inconsistent processing of spatial attributes. Experimental Brain Research 2002, 147:135-144.
67. Stelmach G.E., Mullins P.A., Teulings H.L. Motor programming and temporal patterns in handwriting. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1984, 423:144-157.
68. Summers J.J., Anson J.G. Current status of the motor program: Revisited. Human Movement Science 2009, 28:566-577.
69. Todorov E. Direct cortical control of muscle activation in voluntary arm movements: A model. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3:391-398.
70. Todorov E. One motor cortex, two different views - Reply. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3:963-964.
71. Todorov E. Optimality principles in sensorimotor control. Nature Neuroscience 2004, 7:907-915.
72. Ungerleider L.G., Haxby J.V. 'What' and 'where' in the human brain. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 1994, 4:157-165.
73. Ungerleider L.G., Mishkin M. Two cortical visual systems. Analysis of visual behavior 1982, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. D.J. Ingle, M.A. Goodale, R.J. Mansfield (Eds.).
74. van Mierlo C.M., Louw S., Smeets J.B.J., Brenner E. Slant cues are processed with different latencies for the online control of movement. Journal of Vision 2009, 9:1-8.
75. Wann J.P., Mon-Williams M., McIntosh R.D., Smyth M., Milner A.D. The role of size and binocular information in guiding reaching: Insights from virtual reality and visual form agnosia III (of III). Experimental Brain Research 2001, 139:143-150.
76. Wolpert D.M., Ghahramani Z. Computational principles of movement neuroscience. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3(Suppl.):1212-1217.