Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Dec;35(6):1649-60.
doi: 10.1037/a0016875.

The effects of handedness and reachability on perceived distance

Sally A Linkenauger  1 , Jessica K Witt, Jeanine K Stefanucci, Jonathan Z Bakdash, Dennis R Proffitt
Affiliations

The effects of handedness and reachability on perceived distance

Sally A Linkenauger et al. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2009 Dec.

Abstract

Previous research has suggested that perceived distances are scaled by the action capabilities of the body. The present studies showed that when "reachability" is constrained due to a difficult grasp required to pick up an object, perceived distance to the object increases. Participants estimated the distances to tools with handle orientations that made them either easy or difficult to grasp with their dominant and nondominant hands. Right-handed participants perceived tools that were more difficult to grasp to be farther away than tools that were easier to grasp. However, perceived distance did not differ in left-handed participants. These studies suggest that, when reaching toward a target, the distance to that target is scaled in terms of how far one can effectively reach, given the type of reaching posture that is executed. Furthermore, this effect is modulated by handedness.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Possible orientations of the stimulus during a difficult grasp with the right hand or an easy grasp with the left (a) and possible orientations of the stimulus during a difficult grasp with the left hand or an easy grasp with the right (b).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Left-handed participants perceived distance to the tools based on hand and grasp type. Error bars represent one standard error and are calculated based on within-subject error using the method provided by Loftus and Masson (1994).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Right-handed participants perceived distance to the tools based on hand and grasp type. Error bars represent one standard error and are calculated based on within-subject error using the method provided by Loftus and Masson (1994).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Possible orientations of the stimulus (a) and type of grasp required to pick up the stimuli appropriately at both orientations (b) in Experiments 2 and 5. The dotted line in (a) was added to the picture to illustrate the distance that participants estimated; it was not visible the participants.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Perceived distance to the tools at each distance and in each orientation found in Experiments 2 (right side of the graph) and 5 (left side of the graph). Error bars represent one standard error and are calculated based on within-subject error using the method provided by Loftus and Masson (1994).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Both possible orientations of the stimulus (a) and type of grasp required to pick up the stimulus appropriately at both orientations (b) in Experiments 3, 4, and 6. The dotted line in (a) was added to the picture to illustrate the distance that participants estimated; it was not visible the participants.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Mean estimated distance to the tools at each distance and in each orientation found in Experiments 3 (right side of the graph) and 4 (left side of the graph). Error bars represent one standard error and are calculated based on within-subject error using the method provided by Loftus and Masson (1994).
Figure 8
Figure 8
Mean estimated distance to the tools at each distance and in each orientation found in Experiment 6. Error bars represent one standard error and are calculated based on within-subject error using the method provided by Loftus and Masson (1994).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Annett M. The binomial distribution of right, mixed and left handedness. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1967;19(4):327–333. - PubMed
    1. Bhalla M, Proffitt DR. Visual-Motor Recalibration in Geographical Slant Perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1999;25(4):1–21. - PubMed
    1. Bertamini M, Yang TL, Proffitt DR. Relative size perception at a distance is best at eye level. Perception & Psychophysics. 1998;60(4):673–682. - PubMed
    1. Binkofski F, Buccino G, Posse S, Seitz RJ, Rizzolatti G, Freund HJ. A fronto-parietal circuit for object manipulation in man: evidence from an fMRI-study. European Journal of Neuroscience. 1999;11:3276–3286. - PubMed
    1. Carello C, Grosofsky A, Reichel FD, Solomon HY, Turvey MT. Visually perceiving what is reachable. Ecological Psychology. 1989;1:27–54.

Publication types