Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 202, Issue 2, pp 397–411 | Cite as

Environmental constraints modify the way an interceptive action is controlled

  • Antoine H. P. MoriceEmail author
  • Matthieu François
  • David M. Jacobs
  • Gilles Montagne
Research Article


This study concerns the process by which agents select control laws. Participants adjusted their walking speed in a virtual environment in order to intercept approaching targets. Successful interception can be achieved with a constant bearing angle (CBA) strategy that relies on prospective information, or with a modified required velocity (MRV) strategy, which also includes predictive information. We manipulated the curvature of the target paths and the display condition of these paths. The curvature manipulation had large effects on the walking kinematics when the target paths were not displayed (informationally poor display). In contrast, the walking kinematics were less affected by the curvature manipulation when the target paths were displayed (informationally rich display). This indicates that participants used an MRV strategy in the informationally rich display and a CBA strategy in the informationally poor display. Quantitative fits of the respective models confirm this information-driven switch between the use of a strategy that relies on prospective information and a strategy that includes predictive information. We conclude that agents are able of taking advantage of available information by selecting a suitable control law.


Law of control Interceptive task Bearing angle Required velocity Curved trajectories Virtual reality 



The participation of DMJ in this research project was supported by Project HUM2006-11603-C02-02 of the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science.


  1. Bastin J, Montagne G (2005) The perceptual support of goal-directed displacements is context dependent. Neurosci Lett 376:121–126CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bastin J, Craig C, Montagne G (2006a) Prospective strategies underlie the control of interceptive action. Hum Mov Sci 25:718–732CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bastin J, Calvin S, Montagne G (2006b) Muscular proprioception contributes to the control of interceptive actions. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 32:964–972CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bastin J, Jacobs DM, Morice AHP, Craig C, Montagne G (2008) Testing the role of expansion in the prospective control of locomotion. Exp Brain Res 191:301–312CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Beek PJ, Dessing JC, Peper CE, Bullock D (2003) Modelling the control of interceptive actions. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 358:1511–1523CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Benguigui N, Ripoll H, Broderick MP (2003) Time-to-contact estimation of accelerated stimuli is based on first-order information. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 29:1083–1101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bootsma RJ, Oudejans RRD (1993) Visual information about time-to-collision between two objects. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 19:1041–1052CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bootsma RJ, Fayt V, Zaal FTJM, Laurent M (1997) On the information-based regulation of movement: what Wann (1996) may want to consider. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 23:1282–1289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bruggeman H, Zosh W, Warren WH (2007) Optic flow drives human visuo-locomotor adaptation. Curr Biol 17:2035–2040CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Camachon C, Buekers M, Montagne G (2004) Is the learning of goal-directed displacement effector-independent? Hum Mov Sci 23:239–255CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Chardenon A, Montagne G, Buekers MJ, Laurent M (2002) The visual control of ball interception during human locomotion. Neurosci Lett 334:13–16CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Chardenon A, Montagne G, Laurent M, Bootsma RJ (2004) The perceptual control of goal-directed locomotion: a common architecture for interception and navigation? Exp Brain Res 158:100–108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Chardenon A, Montagne G, Laurent M, Bootsma RJ (2005) A robust solution for dealing with environmental changes in intercepting moving balls. J Mot Behav 37:52–64CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. de Rugy A, Montagne G, Buekers MJ, Laurent M (2000) The study of locomotor pointing in virtual reality: the validation of a test set-up. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 32:215–220Google Scholar
  15. Desmurget M, Grafton S (2000) Forward modelling allows feedback control for fast reaching movements. Trends Cogn Sci 4:423–431CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Diaz GJ, Phillips F, Fajen BR (2009) Intercepting moving targets: a little foresight helps a lot. Exp Brain Res 195:345–360CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Duchon AP, Warren WH (2002) A visual equalization strategy for locomotor control: of honeybees, robots, and humans. Psychol Sci 13:272–278CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Fajen BR (2005a) Perceiving possibilities for action: on the necessity of calibration and perceptual learning for the visual guidance of action. Perception 34:717–740CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Fajen BR (2005b) Calibration, information, and control strategies for braking to avoid a collision. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 31:480–501CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Jacobs DM, Michaels CF (2006) Lateral interception I: operative optical variables, attunement, and calibration. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 32:443–458CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Jacobs DM, Silva PL, Calvo J (2009) An empirical illustration and formalization of the theory of direct learning: the muscle-based perception of kinetic properties. Ecol Psychol 21:245–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kerzel D, Hecht H, Kim NG (2001) Time-to-passage judgments on circular trajectories are based on relative optical acceleration. Percept Psychophys 63:1153–1170PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Larish JF, Flach JM (1990) Sources of optical information useful for perception of speed of rectilinear self-motion. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 16:295–302CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee DN (1974) Visual information during locomotion. In: MacLeod RB, Pick JHL (eds) Perception: essays in honor of James J. Gibson. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, pp 250–267Google Scholar
  25. Lee DN, Reddish PE (1981) Plummeting gannets: a paradigm of ecological optics. Nature 293:293–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lenoir M, Vansteenkiste J, Vermeulen J, De Clercq D (2005) Effects of contrasting colour patterns of the ball in the volleyball reception. J Sports Sci 23:871–879CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Michaels CF, Oudejans RRD (1992) The optics and actions of catching fly balls: zeroing out optical acceleration. Ecol Psychol 4:199–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Montagne G (2005) Prospective control in sport. Intl J Sport Psychol 36:127–150Google Scholar
  29. Montagne G, Laurent M, Durey A, Bootsma RJ (1999) Movement reversals in ball-catching. Exp Brain Res 129:87–92CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Montagne G, Buekers M, Camachon C, de Rugy A, Laurent M (2003) The learning of goal-directed locomotion: a perception-action perspective. Q J Exp Psychol A 56:551–567PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Ooi TL, Wu B, He ZJ (2001) Distance determined by the angular declination below the horizon. Nature 414:197–200CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Peper CE, Bootsma RJ, Mestre DR, Bakker FC (1994) Catching balls: how to get the hand to the right place at the right time. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 20:591–612CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Schöner G, Dose M (1992) A dynamical systems approach to task-level system integration used to plan and control autonomous vehicle motion. Rob Auton Syst 10:253–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Smith MRH, Flach JM, Dittman SM, Stanard T (2001) Monocular optical constraints on collision control. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 27:395–410CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Starkes J, Helsen W, Elliott D (2002) A ménage à trois: the eye, the hand and on-line processing. J Sports Sci 20:217–224CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Tresilian JR (2005) Hitting a moving target: perception and action in the timing of rapid interceptions. Percept Psychophys 67:129–149PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Tydesley DA, Whiting HTA (1975) Operational timing. J Hum Movement Stud 1:172–177Google Scholar
  38. Warren WH (1988) Action modes and laws of control for the visual guidance of action. In: Meijer OG, Roth K (eds) Complex movement behaviour: ‘The’ motor-action controversy. North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 339–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Warren WH (2007) Action-scaled information for the visual control of locomotion. In: Pepping GJ, Grealy MA (eds) Closing the gap: the scientific writings of David N. Lee. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 243–258Google Scholar
  40. Warren WH, Kay BA (1997) Control law switching during visually guided walking. Abs Psychonomic Soc 2:52Google Scholar
  41. Warren WH, Kay BA, Zosh WD, Duchon AP, Sahuc S (2001) Optic flow is used to control human walking. Nat Neurosci 4:213–216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Wilkie RM, Wann JP (2002) Driving as night falls: the contribution of retinal flow and visual direction to the control of steering. Curr Biol 12:2014–2017CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Wilkie RM, Wann JP (2003) Controlling steering and judging heading: retinal flow, visual direction and extraretinal information. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 29:363–378CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Wilkie RM, Wann JP (2005) The role of visual and non visual information in the control of locomotion. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 31:901–911CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Zago M, McIntyre J, Senot P, Lacquaniti F (2009) Visuo-motor coordination and internal models for object interception. Exp Brain Res 192:571–604CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antoine H. P. Morice
    • 1
    Email author
  • Matthieu François
    • 1
  • David M. Jacobs
    • 2
  • Gilles Montagne
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculté des Sciences du Sport, Institut des Sciences du MouvementUniversité de la MéditerranéeMarseilleFrance
  2. 2.Facultad de PsicologíaUniversidad Autónoma de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations