Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 237, Issue 12, pp 3431–3447 | Cite as

Human string-pulling with and without a string: movement, sensory control, and memory

  • Surjeet SinghEmail author
  • Alexei Mandziak
  • Kalob Barr
  • Ashley A. Blackwell
  • Majid H. Mohajerani
  • Douglas G. Wallace
  • Ian Q. Whishaw
Research Article

Abstract

String-pulling is a behavior that is allied to many daily acts and is an easily performed action featuring hand-over-hand movements to reel in a string (or rope). String-pulling has been used as a test of perceptual and cognitive functions in many animal species, including human children, but its movements and sensory control have not been characterized. Male and female university students (n = 68) performed target-based or memory-based string-pulling in which they pulled down a string suspended on an overhead pulley and immediately afterwards attempted to make the same movement in a memory-based test. Frame-by-frame video scoring was used to describe movements, eye-tracking and visual occluding glasses were used to assess sensory control, and a Matlab video-analysis procedure was used to describe kinematics. The string was advanced using five arm/hand movements: with lift and advance comprising fast up movements, and grasp, pull and push comprising slow down movements. Fingers closed 5 (pinky) through 1 (thumb) to make a whole-hand grasp and release in target-based string pulling but moved in a reverse sequence for the memory-based task. Target-based string pulling was not visually guided unless participants were instructed to grasp at a cue, and then vision featured eye-tracking of the target and pupil dilation with the grasp, but there was no relation between eye events for memory-based string-pulling. For target-based string-pulling the left and right hands advanced the string with both independent and concurrent movement but only independent movements were featured in a more symmetrical memory-based movement. The results are discussed in relation to the sensory control of hand movements, contemporary theories of the neural control of hand movements, and species differences in string-pulling.

Keywords

String-pulling Sensory control Reach and grasp Pantomime Bimanual coordination Kinematics 

Notes

Supplementary material

221_2019_5684_MOESM1_ESM.mp4 (1.6 mb)
Video 1. Representative video of target-based string-pulling. (MP4 1643 kb)
221_2019_5684_MOESM2_ESM.mp4 (1.4 mb)
Video 2. Representative video of memory-based sting-pulling. (MP4 1445 kb)

References

  1. Albiach-Serrano A, Bugnyar T, Call J (2012) Apes (Gorilla gorilla, Pan paniscus, P. troglodytes, Pongo abelii) versus corvids (Corvus corax, C. corone) in a support task: the effect of pattern and functionality. J Comp Psychol 126:355–367PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Arthur D, Vassilvitskii S (2007) k-means++: the advantages of careful seeding. In: Proceedings of the eighteenth annual ACM-SIAM symposium on discrete algorithms. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, New Orleans, pp 1027–1035Google Scholar
  3. Blackwell AA, Köppen JR, Whishaw IQ, Wallace DG (2018a) String-pulling for food by the rat: assessment of movement, topography and kinematics of a bilaterally skilled forelimb act. Learn Motiv 61:63–73Google Scholar
  4. Blackwell AA, Banovetz MT, Qandeel Whishaw IQ, Wallace DG (2018b) The structure of arm and hand movements in a spontaneous and food rewarded on-line string-pulling task by the mouse. Behav Brain Res 345:49–58PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Blackwell AA, Widick WL, Cheatwood JL, Whishaw IQ, Wallace DG (2018c) Unilateral forelimb sensorimotor cortex devascularization disrupts the topographic and kinematic characteristics of hand movements while string-pulling for food in the rat. Behav Brain Res 338:88–100PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bookstein FL (1979) Fitting conic sections to scattered data. Comput Grap Image Process 9:56–71Google Scholar
  7. Brown AL (1990) Domain-specific principles affect learning and transfer in children. Cognit Sci 14:107–133Google Scholar
  8. de Bruin N, Sacrey LA, Brown LA, Doan J, Whishaw IQ (2008) Visual guidance for hand advance but not hand withdrawal in a reach-to-eat task in adult humans: reaching is a composite movement. J Mot Behav 40:337–346PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Fitts PM (1954) The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J Exp Psychol 47:381–391PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Freud E, Macdonald SN, Chen J, Quinlan DJ, Goodale MA, Culham JC (2018) Getting a grip on reality: grasping movements directed to real objects and images rely on dissociable neural representations. Cortex 98:34–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Fukui T, Inui T (2013) How vision affects kinematic properties of pantomimed prehension movements. Front Psychol 4:44PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Gander W, Golub GH, Strebel R (1994) Least-squares fitting of circles and ellipses. BIT Numer Math 34:558–578Google Scholar
  13. Gonzalez RC, Woods RE, Eddins SL (2003) Digital image processing using MATLAB. Prentice-Hall, Inc, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodale MA, Milner AD, Jakobson LS, Carey DP (1991) A neurological dissociation between perceiving objects and grasping them. Nature 349:154–156PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Goodale MA, Jakobson LS, Keillor JM (1994) Differences in the visual control of pantomimed and natural grasping movements. Neuropsychologia 32:1159–1178PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hall LA, Karl JM, Thomas BL, Whishaw IQ (2014) Reach and Grasp reconfigurations reveal that proprioception assists reaching and hapsis assists grasping in peripheral vision. Exp Brain Res 232:2807–2819PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Holmes SA, Lohmus J, McKinnon S, Mulla A, Heath M (2013) Distinct visual cues mediate aperture shaping for grasping and pantomime-grasping tasks. J Mot Behav 45:431–439PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Isa T (2019) Dexterous hand movements and their recovery after central nervous system injury. Annu Rev Neurosci 42:315–335PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Jacobs IF, Osvath M (2015) The string-pulling paradigm in comparative psychology. J Comp Psychol 129:89–120PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Jarque-Bou NJ, Scano A, Atzori M, Muller H (2019) Kinematic synergies of hand grasps: a comprehensive study on a large publicly available dataset. J Neuroeng Rehabil 16:63PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Jeannerod M (1981) Intersegmental coordination during reaching at natural visual objects. In: John Long ADB (ed) Attention and performance IX. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 153–168Google Scholar
  22. Jeannerod M, Decety J, Michel F (1994) Impairment of grasping movements following a bilateral posterior parietal lesion. Neuropsychologia 32:369–380PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Karl JM, Whishaw IQ (2013) Different evolutionary origins for the reach and the grasp: an explanation for dual visuomotor channels in primate parietofrontal cortex. Front Neurol 4:208PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Karl JM, Sacrey L-AR, Doan JB, Whishaw IQ (2012) Hand shaping using hapsis resembles visually guided hand shaping. Exp Brain Res 219:59–74PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Kassner M, Patera W, Bulling A (2014) Pupil: an open source platform for pervasive eye tracking and mobile gaze-based interaction. CoRR abs/1405.0006Google Scholar
  26. Kelso JA, Southard DL, Goodman D (1979) On the coordination of two-handed movements. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 5:229–238PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Kendon A (2004) Gesture: visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  28. Kilteni K, Ehrsson HH (2017) Sensorimotor predictions and tool use: hand-held tools attenuate self-touch. Cognition 165:1–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Kuntz JR, Whishaw IQ (2016) Synchrony of the reach and the grasp in pantomime reach-to-grasp. Exp Brain Res 234:3291–3303PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Kuntz JR, Karl JM, Doan JB, Whishaw IQ (2018) Gaze anchoring guides real but not pantomime reach-to-grasp: support for the action-perception theory. Exp Brain Res 236:1091–1103PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Lemon R (2019) Recent advances in our understanding of the primate corticospinal system [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 8Google Scholar
  32. Marder E, Bucher D (2001) Central pattern generators and the control of rhythmic movements. Curr Biol 11:R986–996PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. McNeill D (1992) Hand and mind: what gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  34. Meyer F (1994) Topographic distance and watershed lines. Signal Process 38:113–125Google Scholar
  35. Milner AD, Dijkerman HC, Pisella L, McIntosh RD, Tilikete C, Vighetto A, Rossetti Y (2001) Grasping the past. delay can improve visuomotor performance. Curr Biol 11:1896–1901PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Neggers SF, Bekkering H (2000) Ocular gaze is anchored to the target of an ongoing pointing movement. J Neurophysiol 83:639–651PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Neggers SF, Bekkering H (2001) Gaze anchoring to a pointing target is present during the entire pointing movement and is driven by a non-visual signal. J Neurophysiol 86:961–970PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9:97–113PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Otsu N (1979) A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 9:62–66Google Scholar
  40. Perry J (1992) Gait analysis: normal and pathological function. J Pediatr Orthop 12:815Google Scholar
  41. Piaget J (1952) The origins of intelligence in children. W W Norton & Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Prablanc C, Echallier JE, Jeannerod M, Komilis E (1979) Optimal response of eye and hand motor systems in pointing at a visual target. II. Static and dynamic visual cues in the control of hand movement. Biol Cybern 35:183–187PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Rat-Fischer L, O’Regan JK, Fagard J (2014) Comparison of active and purely visual performance in a multiple-string means-end task in infants. Cognition 133:304–316PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Redshaw M (1978) Cognitive development in human and gorilla infants. J Hum Evol 7:133–141Google Scholar
  45. Richardson HM (1932) The growth of adaptive behavior in infants: an experimental study at seven age levels. Genet Psychol Monogr 12:195–359Google Scholar
  46. Sacrey LA, Whishaw IQ (2012) Subsystems of sensory attention for skilled reaching: vision for transport and pre-shaping and somatosensation for grasping, withdrawal and release. Behav Brain Res 231:356–365PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Sacrey LA, Alaverdashvili M, Whishaw IQ (2009) Similar hand shaping in reaching-for-food (skilled reaching) in rats and humans provides evidence of homology in release, collection, and manipulation movements. Behav Brain Res 204:153–161PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Salvietti G (2018) Replicating human hand synergies onto robotic hands: a review on software and hardware strategies. Front Neurorobot 12:27PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Silva FJ, Page DM, Silva KM (2005) Methodological-conceptual problems in the study of chimpanzees’ folk physics: how studies with adult humans can help. Learn Behav 33:47–58PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Silva FJ, Silva KM, Cover KR, Leslie AL, Rubalcaba MA (2008) Humans’ folk physics is sensitive to physical connection and contact between a tool and reward. Behav Proc 77:327–333Google Scholar
  51. Singh S, Kaur H, Sandhir R (2016) Fractal dimensions: a new paradigm to assess spatial memory and learning using Morris water maze. Behav Brain Res 299:141–146PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Singh S, Bermudez-Contreras E, Nazari M, Sutherland RJ, Mohajerani MH (2019) Low-cost solution for rodent home-cage behaviour monitoring. PLoS One 14:e0220751PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. Swinnen SP (2002) Intermanual coordination: from behavioural principles to neural-network interactions. Nat Rev Neurosci 3:348–359PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Swinnen SP, Wenderoth N (2004) Two hands, one brain: cognitive neuroscience of bimanual skill. Trends Cogn Sci 8:18–25Google Scholar
  55. Taylor AH, Knaebe B, Gray RD (2012) An end to insight? New Caledonian crows can spontaneously solve problems without planning their actions. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 279:4977–4981Google Scholar
  56. Wannier T, Bastiaanse C, Colombo G, Dietz V (2001) Arm to leg coordination in humans during walking, creeping and swimming activities. Exp Brain Res 141:375–379PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Westwood DA, Chapman CD, Roy EA (2000) Pantomimed actions may be controlled by the ventral visual stream. Exp Brain Res 130:545–548PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Whishaw IQ, Karl JM (2014) The contribution of the reach and the grasp to shaping brain and behaviour. Can J Exp Psychol 68:223–235PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Whishaw IQ, Travis SG, Koppe SW, Sacrey LA, Gholamrezaei G, Gorny B (2010) Hand shaping in the rat: conserved release and collection vs. flexible manipulation in overground walking, ladder rung walking, cylinder exploration, and skilled reaching. Behav Brain Res 206:21–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Wu H, Li L, Li L, Liu T, Wang J (2019) Review of comprehensive intervention by hand rehabilitation robot after stroke. Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi 36:151–156PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Neuroscience, Canadian Centre for Behavioural Neuroscience (CCBN)University of LethbridgeLethbridgeCanada
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyNorthern Illinois UniversityDeKalbUSA

Personalised recommendations