# Inverting the planning gradient: adjustment of grasps to late segments of multi-step object manipulations

• Research Article
• Published:

## Abstract

When someone grasps an object, the grasp depends on the intended object manipulation and usually facilitates it. If several object manipulation steps are planned, the first step has been reported to primarily determine the grasp selection. We address whether the grasp can be aligned to the second step, if the second step’s requirements exceed those of the first step. Participants grasped and rotated a dial first by a small extent and then by various extents in the opposite direction, without releasing the dial. On average, when the requirements of the first and the second step were similar, participants mostly aligned the grasp to the first step. When the requirements of the second step were considerably higher, participants aligned the grasp to the second step, even though the first step still had a considerable impact. Participants employed two different strategies. One subgroup initially aligned the grasp to the first step and then ceased adjusting the grasp to either step. Another group also initially aligned the grasp to the first step and then switched to aligning it primarily to the second step. The data suggest that participants are more likely to switch to the latter strategy when they experienced more awkward arm postures. In summary, grasp selections for multi-step object manipulations can be aligned to the second object manipulation step, if the requirements of this step clearly exceed those of the first step and if participants have some experience with the task.

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

## Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
• Get 10 units per month
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

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

## Notes

1. We report Greenhouse-Geisser corrected p-values but uncorrected dfs. Effect sizes are reported as described in Lakens (2013).

2. A split-plot ANOVA with within-participant factor block (5, 6, 7, 8) and between-participant factor group revealed neither a main effect of block (F[3,171] = 0.038, p = .959, η2 p = 0.001) nor an interaction between block and two-step sequence: F(6,171) = 0.451, p = .766, η2 p = 0.016.

3. For one participant, ΔGO30° was − 1.03°. The within-participant standard deviation of GO for clockwise and counterclockwise 30° rotations for this participant was 31° and 16°, respectively. For the remaining 59 participants, ΔGO30° had a positive value.

## References

• Abeele S, Bock O (2001) Sensorimotor adaptation to rotated visual input: different mechanisms for small versus large rotations. Exp Brain Res 140(4):407–410. doi:10.1007/s002210100846

• Coren S (1993) The lateral preference inventory for measurement of handedness, footedness, eyedness, and earedness: norms for young adults. Bull Psychon Soc 31(1):1–3.

• Haggard P (1998) Planning of action sequences. Acta Psychol 99(2):201–215. doi:10.1016/S0001-6918(98)00011-0

• Herbort O (2013) Optimal versus heuristic planning of object manipulations: A review and a computational model of the continuous end-state comfort effect. New Ideas Psychol 31(3):291–301. doi:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2013.01.003

• Herbort O (2015) Too much anticipation? Large anticipatory adjustments of grasping movements to minimal object manipulations. Hum Mov Sci 42:100–116. doi:10.1016/j.humov.2015.05.002

• Herbort O, Butz MV (2012) The continuous end-state comfort effect: weighted integration of multiple biases. Psychol Res 76(3):345–363. doi:10.1007/s00426-011-0334-7

• Herbort O, Butz MV, Kunde W (2014) The contribution of cognitive, kinematic, and dynamic factors to anticipatory grasp selection. Exp Brain Res 232(6):1677–1688. doi:10.1007/s00221-014-3849-5

• Herbort O, Mathew H, Kunde W (2017) Habit outweighs planning in grasp selection for object manipulation. Cogn Psychol 92:127–140. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.11.008

• Hughes C, Seegelke C, Schack T (2012) The influence of initial and final precision on motor planning: individual differences in end-state comfort during unimanual grasping and placing. J Motor Behav 44(3):195–201. doi:10.1080/00222895.2012.672483

• Huhn JM, Potts CA, Rosenbaum DA (2016) Cognitive framing in action. Cognition 151:42–51. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2016.02.015

• Janssen L, Crajé C, Weigelt M, Steenbergen B (2010) Motor planning in bimanual object manipulation: two plans for two hands? Motor Control 14(2):240–254

• Künzell S, Augste C, Hering M, Maier S, Meinzinger A-M, Sießmeir D (2013) Optimal control in the critical phase of movement: a functional approach to motor planning processes. Acta Psychol 143(3):310–316. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.04.013

• Lakens D (2013) Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t tests and ANOVAs. Front Psychol 4:863. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863

• Mazzoni P, Krakauer JW (2006) An implicit plan overrides an explicit strategy during visuomotor adaptation. J Neurosci 26(14):3642–3645. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5317-05.2006

• Rosenbaum DA, Jorgensen MJ (1992) Planning macroscopic aspects of manual control. Hum Mov Sci 11(1–2):61–69. doi:10.1016/0167-9457(92)90050-L

• 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, Vol. XIII. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, pp 321–345

• Rosenbaum DA, van Heugten CM, Caldwell GE (1996) From cognition to biomechanics and back: the end-state comfort effect and the middle-is-faster effect. Acta Psychol 94:59–85. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(95)00062-3

• Rosenbaum DA, Chapman KM, Weigelt M, Weiss DJ, van der Wel R (2012) Cognition, action, and object manipulations. Psychol Bull 138(5):924–946. doi:10.1037/a0027839

• Seegelke C, Hughes CM, Schütz C, Schack T (2012) Individual differences in motor planning during a multi-segment object manipulation task. Exp Brain Res 222(1–2):125–136. doi:10.1007/s00221-012-3203-8

• Seegelke C, Hughes CM, Knoblauch A, Schack T (2013) Grasp posture planning during multi-segment object manipulation tasks—interaction between cognitive and biomechanical factors. Acta Psychol 144(3):513–521. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.09.002

• Short MW, Cauraugh JH (1999) Precision hypothesis and the end-state comfort effect. Acta Psychol 100(3):243–252. doi:10.1016/S0001-6918(98)00020-1

• Sülzenbrück S, Heuer H (2009) Functional independence of explicit and implicit motor adjustments. Conscious Cogn 18(1):145–159. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2008.12.001

• Verwey WB, Shea CH, Wright DL (2015) A cognitive framework for explaining serial processing and sequence execution strategies. Psychon Bull Rev 22(1): 54–77. doi:10.3758/s13423-014-0773-4

• Weigelt M, Rosenbaum DA, Huelshorst S, Schack T (2009) Moving and memorizing: motor planning modulates the recency effect in serial and free recall. Acta Psychol 132:68–79. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.06.005

• Wunsch K, Henning A, Aschersleben G, Weigelt M (2013) A systematic review of the end-state comfort effect in normally developing children and in children with developmental disorders. J Motor Learn Dev 1(3):59–76

## Acknowledgements

This work was funded by Grant HE 6710/2-1 of the German Research Foundation (DFG) granted to Oliver Herbort. We thank Albrecht Sebald and Georg Schüssler for technical support.

## Author information

Authors

### Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oliver Herbort.

## Ethics declarations

### 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.

## Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

## Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Mathew, H., Kunde, W. & Herbort, O. Inverting the planning gradient: adjustment of grasps to late segments of multi-step object manipulations. Exp Brain Res 235, 1397–1409 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-4892-9