抓取微小物体

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-30 DOI:10.1007/s00426-024-01947-8
Martin Giesel, Federico De Filippi, Constanze Hesse
{"title":"抓取微小物体","authors":"Martin Giesel, Federico De Filippi, Constanze Hesse","doi":"10.1007/s00426-024-01947-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In grasping studies, maximum grip aperture (MGA) is commonly used as an indicator of the object size representation within the visuomotor system. However, a number of additional factors, such as movement safety, comfort, and efficiency, might affect the scaling of MGA with object size and potentially mask perceptual effects on actions. While unimanual grasping has been investigated for a wide range of object sizes, so far very small objects (<5 mm) have not been included. Investigating grasping of these tiny objects is particularly interesting because it allows us to evaluate the three most prominent explanatory accounts of grasping (the perception-action model, the digits-in-space hypothesis, and the biomechanical account) by comparing the predictions that they make for these small objects. In the first experiment, participants ( <math><mrow><mi>N</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>26</mn></mrow> </math> ) grasped and manually estimated the height of square cuboids with heights from 0.5 to 5 mm. In the second experiment, a different sample of participants ( <math><mrow><mi>N</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>24</mn></mrow> </math> ) performed the same tasks with square cuboids with heights from 5 to 20 mm. We determined MGAs, manual estimation apertures (MEA), and the corresponding just-noticeable differences (JND). In both experiments, MEAs scaled with object height and adhered to Weber's law. MGAs for grasping scaled with object height in the second experiment but not consistently in the first experiment. JNDs for grasping never scaled with object height. We argue that the digits-in-space hypothesis provides the most plausible account of the data. Furthermore, the findings highlight that the reliability of MGA as an indicator of object size is strongly task-dependent.</p>","PeriodicalId":48184,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","volume":" ","pages":"1678-1690"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11281983/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Grasping tiny objects.\",\"authors\":\"Martin Giesel, Federico De Filippi, Constanze Hesse\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00426-024-01947-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In grasping studies, maximum grip aperture (MGA) is commonly used as an indicator of the object size representation within the visuomotor system. However, a number of additional factors, such as movement safety, comfort, and efficiency, might affect the scaling of MGA with object size and potentially mask perceptual effects on actions. While unimanual grasping has been investigated for a wide range of object sizes, so far very small objects (<5 mm) have not been included. Investigating grasping of these tiny objects is particularly interesting because it allows us to evaluate the three most prominent explanatory accounts of grasping (the perception-action model, the digits-in-space hypothesis, and the biomechanical account) by comparing the predictions that they make for these small objects. In the first experiment, participants ( <math><mrow><mi>N</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>26</mn></mrow> </math> ) grasped and manually estimated the height of square cuboids with heights from 0.5 to 5 mm. In the second experiment, a different sample of participants ( <math><mrow><mi>N</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>24</mn></mrow> </math> ) performed the same tasks with square cuboids with heights from 5 to 20 mm. We determined MGAs, manual estimation apertures (MEA), and the corresponding just-noticeable differences (JND). In both experiments, MEAs scaled with object height and adhered to Weber's law. MGAs for grasping scaled with object height in the second experiment but not consistently in the first experiment. JNDs for grasping never scaled with object height. We argue that the digits-in-space hypothesis provides the most plausible account of the data. Furthermore, the findings highlight that the reliability of MGA as an indicator of object size is strongly task-dependent.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48184,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1678-1690\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11281983/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-01947-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-01947-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在抓握研究中,最大抓握孔径(MGA)通常被用作视觉运动系统中物体大小表征的指标。然而,一些额外的因素,如运动安全性、舒适性和效率,可能会影响最大抓握孔径与物体大小的比例关系,并有可能掩盖对动作的知觉影响。虽然单手抓取已针对多种物体大小进行了研究,但迄今为止,仅对非常小的物体(N = 26)进行了抓取,并手动估算了高度为 0.5 至 5 毫米的正方体的高度。在第二个实验中,不同样本的参与者(N = 24)对高度为 5 至 20 毫米的正方体立方体执行了相同的任务。我们确定了 MGA、手动估计孔径 (MEA) 以及相应的刚注意到的差异 (JND)。在这两项实验中,MEA 随物体高度的增加而增加,并遵循韦伯定律。在第二个实验中,用于抓取的 MGA 随物体高度的增加而增加,但在第一个实验中却不一致。用于抓取的 JND 从未随物体高度变化而变化。我们认为,"数字在空间中 "的假说为数据提供了最合理的解释。此外,研究结果还强调,MGA 作为物体大小指标的可靠性与任务密切相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Grasping tiny objects.

In grasping studies, maximum grip aperture (MGA) is commonly used as an indicator of the object size representation within the visuomotor system. However, a number of additional factors, such as movement safety, comfort, and efficiency, might affect the scaling of MGA with object size and potentially mask perceptual effects on actions. While unimanual grasping has been investigated for a wide range of object sizes, so far very small objects (<5 mm) have not been included. Investigating grasping of these tiny objects is particularly interesting because it allows us to evaluate the three most prominent explanatory accounts of grasping (the perception-action model, the digits-in-space hypothesis, and the biomechanical account) by comparing the predictions that they make for these small objects. In the first experiment, participants ( N = 26 ) grasped and manually estimated the height of square cuboids with heights from 0.5 to 5 mm. In the second experiment, a different sample of participants ( N = 24 ) performed the same tasks with square cuboids with heights from 5 to 20 mm. We determined MGAs, manual estimation apertures (MEA), and the corresponding just-noticeable differences (JND). In both experiments, MEAs scaled with object height and adhered to Weber's law. MGAs for grasping scaled with object height in the second experiment but not consistently in the first experiment. JNDs for grasping never scaled with object height. We argue that the digits-in-space hypothesis provides the most plausible account of the data. Furthermore, the findings highlight that the reliability of MGA as an indicator of object size is strongly task-dependent.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
8.70%
发文量
137
期刊介绍: Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung publishes articles that contribute to a basic understanding of human perception, attention, memory, and action. The Journal is devoted to the dissemination of knowledge based on firm experimental ground, but not to particular approaches or schools of thought. Theoretical and historical papers are welcome to the extent that they serve this general purpose; papers of an applied nature are acceptable if they contribute to basic understanding or serve to bridge the often felt gap between basic and applied research in the field covered by the Journal.
期刊最新文献
Input device matters for measures of behaviour in online experiments. Visuospatial working memory and (free and cued) recall of survey knowledge after environment navigation. Anchoring bias in mental arithmetic. Autonomy-supportive instructional language does not enhance skill acquisition compared to controlling instructional language. Linguistic markedness and body specificity in parity judgments: evidence from a go/no-go task.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1