Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30850853›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2019

Some binocular advantages for planning reach, but not grasp, components of prehension.

Simon Grant, Miriam L Conway

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Deficits in Reach Planning and On-Line Grasp Control in Adults With Amblyopia.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. The role of binocular vision in the control and development of visually guided upper limb movements.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Does vision extract absolute distance from vergence?Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2020
    Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Simon GrantApplied Vision Research Centre, City, University of London, Northampton Square, London, EC1V 0HB, UK. s.grant@city.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6141-538X
Miriam L ConwayApplied Vision Research Centre, City, University of London, Northampton Square, London, EC1V 0HB, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proficient (fast, accurate, precise) hand actions for reaching-to-grasp 3D objects are known to benefit significantly from the use of binocular vision compared to one eye alone. We examined whether these binocular advantages derive from increased reliability in encoding the goal object's properties for feedforward planning of prehension movements or from enhanced feedback mediating their online control. Adult participants reached for, precision grasped and lifted cylindrical table-top objects (two sizes, 2 distances) using binocular vision or only their dominant/sighting eye or their non-dominant eye to program and fully execute their movements or using each of the three viewing conditions only to plan their reach-to-grasp during a 1 s preview, with vision occluded just before movement onset. Various kinematic measures of reaching and grasping proficiency, including corrective error rates, were quantified and compared by view, feedback and object type. Some significant benefits of binocular over monocular vision when they were just available for pre-movement planning were retained for the reach regardless of target distance, including higher peak velocities, straighter paths and shorter low velocity approach times, although these latter were contaminated by more velocity corrections and by poorer coordination with object contact. By contrast, virtually all binocular advantages for grasping, including improvements in peak grip aperture scaling, the accuracy and precision of digit placements at object contact and shorter grip application times preceding the lift, were eliminated with no feedback available, outcomes that were influenced by the object's size. We argue that vergence cues can improve the reliability of binocular internal representations of object distance for the feedforward programming of hand transport, whereas the major benefits of binocular vision for enhancing grasping performance derive exclusively from its continuous presence online.

Indexed as

AdultBiomechanical PhenomenaDepth PerceptionFeedback, SensoryFemaleHumansMaleMotor ActivityPsychomotor PerformanceVision, BinocularVision, MonocularYoung AdultInternal modelMonocular visionOnline controlStereopsisVisual feedbackVisuomotor behaviour

Identifiers

PMID30850853
PMCPMC6557882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.