17.01.2013 Views

Chapter 2. Prehension

Chapter 2. Prehension

Chapter 2. Prehension

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Chapter</strong> 3 - Serial Order in <strong>Prehension</strong> 59<br />

transport and grasping components. Research that restricts visual in-<br />

formation to the central or peripheral visual fields shows differential<br />

effects on the transport and grasping components, thereby extending<br />

the distinctions made in Paillard’s conceptual model.<br />

Significant limitations to these conceptual models relate to the un-<br />

derlying question of the sequencing of phases. Jeannerod’s analyses<br />

were strictly limited to movement before contact with the object, yet he<br />

also argues for the separation of this movement into two distinct<br />

phases. As Paillard (1982b) anticipated, and others have experimen-<br />

tally demonstrated, there are obvious differences in the movement be-<br />

fore and after contact with the object. For example, multiple phases of<br />

force application have been identified after contact with the object. As<br />

well, much has been written in the robotics literature about stably<br />

grasping and manipulating objects. A more comprehensive model<br />

must be developed to reflect current knowledge of the entire complex-<br />

ity of grasping movement.<br />

For the modeller, the conceptual model does not explain exactly<br />

what information is being transferred or controlled. What are the in-<br />

puts and outputs? For example, what is the size information being<br />

passed to the ‘finger adjustment’ schema, and what exactly does it<br />

mean to adjust the fingers? Many researchers, such as Jeannerod,<br />

have looked at the aperture between the thumb and index finger as a<br />

metric of hand shaping. Is this a valid metric, or are there more<br />

revealing, complete methods for quantifying hand shaping? In light of<br />

the prehensile classification schemes outlined in <strong>Chapter</strong> 2, the size of<br />

the aperture may be a reasonable measure for pad opposition, but is it<br />

valid as a measure for other grasps involving hand surfaces other than<br />

the fingers pads?<br />

Two main messages can be seen in Jeannerod’s results and the<br />

conceptual models of Arbib, Greene, and Paillard. First, the system is<br />

a distributed one, involving parallel activation and coordinated control<br />

of several components or subsystems. In addition to the transport and<br />

grasping components, parallel activation and control of head and eye<br />

movement occurs in order to foveate objects. Likewise, there are cor-<br />

responding postural adjustments to optimize interaction with the object<br />

and maintain stability or balance. While all these subsystems are im-<br />

portant, this book concentrates primarily on the transport and grasping<br />

components. The second main message is that there are different<br />

phases as the unified act of grasping unfolds. The problem of serial<br />

order in behavior has long been of interest (see Lashley, 1951).<br />

Detailing the phases of prehension at a conceptual level, based on ex-

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!