Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Smooth at one end and rough at the other: influence of object texture on grasping behaviour

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Experimental Brain Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When picking up objects using a pinch grip, there are usually numerous places at which one could place the thumb and index finger. Yet, people seem to consistently place them at or close to the centre of mass (COM), presumably to minimize torque and therefore the required grip force. People also prefer to grasp objects by parallel surfaces and ones with higher friction coefficients (rough surfaces), to prevent the object from slipping when they lift it. Here, we examine the trade-off between friction and COM. Participants were asked to grasp and lift aluminium bars of which one end was polished and therefore smooth and the other was rough. Their finger positions were recorded to determine how they grasped the objects. The bars were oriented horizontally in the frontal plane, with the centre aligned with the participants’ body midline. The bars varied in the horizontal offset between the COM and the edge of the rough region. The offset could be 0, 1 or 2 cm. We expected participants to grasp closer to the rough area than the centre of the bar. Completely rough bars and completely smooth bars served as control conditions. The slipperiness of the surface that was grasped affected the height of the grasping points, indicating that participants adjusted their grasping behaviour to the slipperiness of the surface. However, the tendency to grasp closer to the rough area was minimal. This shows that the judged COM largely determines how an object is grasped. Friction has very limited influence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bingham GP, Muchisky MM (1993) Center of mass perception and internal frames of reference. Percept Psychophys 54(5):617–632

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cole KJ, Rotella DL, Harper JG (1999) Mechanisms of age-related changes of fingertip forces during precision gripping and lifting in adults. J Neurosci 19(8):3238–3327

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Edin BB, Westling G, Johansson RS (1992) Independent control of human finger-tip forces at individual digits during precision lifting. J Physiol 450:547–564

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Endo S, Wing AM, Bracewell RM (2011) Haptic and visual influences on grasp point selection. J Mot Behav 43(6):427–431. doi:10.1080/00222895.2011.621996

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fu Q, Zhang W, Santello M (2010) Anticipatory planning and control of grasp positions and forces for dexterous two-digit manipulation. J Neurosci 30(27):9117–9126

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Goodale MA, Meenan JP, Bülthoff HH, Nicolle DA, Murphy KJ, Racicot CI (1994) Separate neural pathways for the visual analysis of object shape in perception and prehension. Curr Biol 4:604–610

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hiramatsu Y, Kimura D, Kadota K, Ito T, Kinoshita H (2015) Control of precision grip force in lifting and holding of low-mass objects. PLoS ONE 10(9):e0138506. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138506

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinholdermann U, Brenner E, Franz VH, Smeets JBJ (2007) Grasping trapezoidal objects. Exp Brain Res 180:415–420

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinholdermann U, Franz VH, Gegenfurtner KR (2013) Human grasp point selection. J Vis 13(8):23, 1–12. doi:10.1167/13.8.23

  • Lederman SJ, Wing AM (2003) Perceptual judgment, grasp point selection and object symmetry. Exp Brain Res 152:156–165

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee-Miller T, Marneweck M, Santello M, Gordon AM (2016) Visual cues of object properties differentially affect anticipatory planning of digit forces and placement. PLoS ONE 11(4):e0154033. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154033

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Olk B, Wee J, Kingstone A (2004) The effect of hemispatial neglect on the perception of centre. Brain Cogn 55:365–367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paulun VC, Kleinholdermann U, Gegenfurtner KR, Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (2014) Center or side: biases in selecting grasp points on small bars. Exp Brain Res 232:2061–2072

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paulun VC, Gegenfurtner KR, Goodale MA, Fleming RW (2016) Effects of material properties and object orientation on precision grip kinematics. Exp Brain Res 234:2253–2265. doi:10.1007/s00221-016-4631-7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Peters RM, Hackeman E, Goldreich D (2009) Diminutive digits discern delicate details: fingertip size and the sex difference in tactile spatial acuity. J Neurosci 29(50):15756–15761

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum DA, Marchak F, Barnes HJ, Vaughan J, Slotta JD, Jorgensen MJ (1990) Constraints for action selection: overhand versus underhand grips. In: Jeannerod M (ed) Attention and performance XIII: motor representation and control. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 321–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Schot WD, Brenner E, Smeets JBJ (2010) Robust movement segmentation by combining multiple sources of information. J Neurosci Methods 187:147–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Soechting JF, Buneo CA, Herrmann U, Flanders M (1995) Moving effortlessly in three dimensions: does Donders’ law apply to arm movement? J Neurosci 15(9):6271–6280

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wing AM, Lederman SJ (1998) Anticipating load torques produced by voluntary movements. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 24(6):1571–1581

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wing AM, Lederman SJ (2009) Points for precision grip. In: Nowak DA, Hermsdörfer J (eds) Sensorimotor control for grasping: physiology and pathophysiology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 193–203

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zelik KE, Kuo AD (2012) Mechanical work as an indirect measure of subjective costs influencing human movement. PLoS ONE 7(2):331143. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031143

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

CG was supported by a grant from IEEE’s Technical Committee on Haptics (Student Exchange Program for Cross-Disciplinary Fertilization) and the Cluster of Excellence Cognitive Interaction Technology ‘CITEC’(EXC 277) at Bielefeld University, which is funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG). MAP was supported by a VENI Grant (MaGW 451-12-040) from the Dutch organization for scientific research (NWO).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cognitive Neuroscience/Cognitive Interaction Technology Center of Excellence (CITEC), Bielefeld University, Universitätsstraße 25, 33615, Bielefeld, Germany

    Catharina Glowania & L. C. J. van Dam

  2. Department of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    E. Brenner & M. A. Plaisier

  3. Department of Biomechanical Engineering, Faculty 3ME, TU Delft, Delft, The Netherlands

    M. A. Plaisier

  4. University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, CO4 3SQ, UK

    L. C. J. van Dam

Authors
  1. Catharina Glowania
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. C. J. van Dam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Brenner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. A. Plaisier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catharina Glowania.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Glowania, C., van Dam, L.C.J., Brenner, E. et al. Smooth at one end and rough at the other: influence of object texture on grasping behaviour. Exp Brain Res 235, 2821–2827 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-5016-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-5016-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation