The effect of the Uznadze illusion is temporally dynamic in closed-loop but temporally constant in open-loop grasping
- PMID: 37784227
- DOI: 10.1177/17470218231206907
The effect of the Uznadze illusion is temporally dynamic in closed-loop but temporally constant in open-loop grasping
Abstract
Although it is known that the availability of visual feedback modulates grasping kinematics, it is unclear whether this extends to both the early and late stages of the movement. We tackled this issue by exposing participants to the Uznadze illusion (a medium stimulus appears larger or smaller after exposure to smaller or larger inducers). After seeing smaller or larger discs, participants grasped a medium disc with (closed-loop [CL]) or without (open-loop [OL]) visual feedback. Our main aim was to assess whether the time course of the illusion from the movement onset up to the grasp differed between OL and CL. Moreover, we compared OL and CL illusory effects on maximum grip aperture (MGA) and tested whether preparation time, movement time, and time to MGA predicted illusion magnitude. Results revealed that CL illusory effects decreased over movement time, whereas OL ones remained constant. At the time of MGA, OL, and CL effects were, however, of similar size. Although OL grasps were longer to prepare and showed earlier and larger MGAs, such differences had little impact on modulating the illusion. These results suggest that the early stage of grasping is sensitive to the Uznadze illusion both under CL and OL conditions, whereas the late phase is sensitive to it only under OL conditions. We discuss these findings within the framework of theoretical models on the functional properties of the dorsal stream for visually guided actions.
Keywords: Perception and action; Uznadze illusion; grasping; planning control; two-visual-systems hypothesis.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Similar articles
-
The Uznadze illusion reveals similar effects of relative size on perception and action.Exp Brain Res. 2019 Apr;237(4):953-965. doi: 10.1007/s00221-019-05480-8. Epub 2019 Jan 25. Exp Brain Res. 2019. PMID: 30683958
-
Does visuomotor adaptation contribute to illusion-resistant grasping?Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Apr;25(2):827-845. doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1368-7. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018. PMID: 28853037 Free PMC article.
-
Time course analysis of closed- and open-loop grasping of the Müller-Lyer illusion.J Mot Behav. 2005 May;37(3):179-85. doi: 10.3200/JMBR.37.3.179-185. J Mot Behav. 2005. PMID: 15883115
-
Illusions in action: consequences of inconsistent processing of spatial attributes.Exp Brain Res. 2002 Nov;147(2):135-44. doi: 10.1007/s00221-002-1185-7. Epub 2002 Sep 28. Exp Brain Res. 2002. PMID: 12410328 Review.
-
When is grasping affected by the Müller-Lyer illusion? A quantitative review.Neuropsychologia. 2009 May;47(6):1421-33. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.10.031. Epub 2008 Nov 19. Neuropsychologia. 2009. PMID: 19059422 Review.
Cited by
-
Perception-Action dissociations depend on factors that affect multisensory processing.PLoS One. 2024 Nov 4;19(11):e0301737. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0301737. eCollection 2024. PLoS One. 2024. PMID: 39495722 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources