17.01.2013 Views

Chapter 2. Prehension

Chapter 2. Prehension

Chapter 2. Prehension

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Chapter</strong> 7 - Opposition Space Phases 289<br />

hand postures, using expert systems and neural networks. Expert<br />

systems make explicit the rules of these mappings; neural networks<br />

can learn the rules. Yet, none of these are performing the mapping the<br />

other way; i.e., how do the constraints of hand anatomy (level of<br />

fatigue, motivations, etc.) drive the choice of the opposition vector?<br />

Thirdly, a location and orientation in space for the hand to go to<br />

must be planned. Planning a hand location and orientation will depend<br />

on the grasp strategy chosen. Such a decision can be based on retinal<br />

information or on knowledge about the hand. It has been shown how<br />

wrist orientation is affected by task constraints. But this is the same<br />

issue as raised above. Constraints of the anatomy and other biological<br />

and motivational factors affect the perceived opposition vector, and<br />

thus the choice of the opposition space of the hand.<br />

How this plan is constructed in the brain is open to discussion. In<br />

<strong>Chapter</strong>s 3 and 4, task plans from a variety of fields were examined,<br />

showing possible mechanisms for programming phases, for<br />

integrating feedforward and feedback controllers, and for including<br />

contingencies for error. Some models suggested distributed control,<br />

others hierarchical control. Other models suggested how plans could<br />

be mapped out across regions of cortical and sub-cortical areas in the<br />

CNS. Neural recordings have amply demonstrated the CNS is<br />

computing something; what it is computing is unknown. Importantly,<br />

planning takes time, and reaction time studies have demonstrated that<br />

the more complex the movement, the longer the reaction time. Of<br />

course, subsequent movements can be planned during initial<br />

movements.<br />

From the experiments and computational models put forth in<br />

<strong>Chapter</strong>s 3-4, the underlying hypotheses are made explicit for the<br />

reader's further evaluation and research:<br />

1. A task plan is built in terms of sensory consequences (Abbs and<br />

Cole, 1987).<br />

<strong>2.</strong> Motor equivalence suggests task planning does not occur at the<br />

muscle level.<br />

3. A minimal amount of time is needed for planning. More time is<br />

needed for a more complicated serial task (Henry & Rogers,<br />

1960).<br />

4. Kuperstein (1988) built associations of maps between the eye<br />

position and arm configuration. This suggests that a person<br />

must look at where he/she wants the arm to go before<br />

movement occurs.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!