Skip to main content
Log in

Center or side: biases in selecting grasp points on small bars

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

Abstract

Choosing appropriate grasp points is necessary for successfully interacting with objects in our environment. We brought two possible determinants of grasp point selection into conflict: the attempt to grasp an object near its center of mass to minimize torque and ensure stability and the attempt to minimize movement distance. We let our participants grasp two elongated objects of different mass and surface friction that were approached from different distances to both sides of the object. Maximizing stability predicts grasp points close to the object’s center, while minimizing movement costs predicts a bias of the grasp axis toward the side at which the movement started. We found smaller deviations from the center of mass for the smooth and heavy object, presumably because the larger torques and more slippery surface for the heavy object increase the chance of unwanted object rotation. However, our right-handed participants tended to grasp the objects to the right of the center of mass, irrespective of where the movement started. The rightward bias persisted when vision was removed once the hand was half way to the object. It was reduced when the required precision was increased. Starting the movement above the object eliminated the bias. Grasping with the left hand, participants tended to grasp the object to the left of its center. Thus, the selected grasp points seem to reflect a compromise between maximizing stability by grasping near the center of mass and grasping on the side of the acting hand, perhaps to increase visibility of the object.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander RM (1991) Energy-saving mechanisms in walking and running. J Exp Biol 60:55–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander RM (1997) A minimum energy cost hypothesis for human arm trajectories. Biol Cybern 76:97–105

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berret B, Chiovetto E, Nori F, Pozzo T (2011) Evidence for composite cost function in arm movement planning: an inverse optimal control approach. PLoS Comput Biol 7(10):e1002183. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002183

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Blake A (1995) A symmetry theory of planar grasp. Int J Rob Res 14:425–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuijpers RH, Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (2004) On the relation between object shape and grasping kinematics. J Neurophysiol 91:2598–2606

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eastough D, Edwards MG (2007) Movement kinematics in prehension are affected by grasping objects of different mass. Exp Brain Res 176:193–198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott D, Hansen S, Mendoza J, Tremlay L (2004) Learning to optimize speed, accuracy, and energy expenditure: a framework for understanding speed-accuracy relations in goal-directed aiming. J Mot Behav 36(3):339–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Endo S, Wing AM, Bracewell RM (2011) Haptic and visual influences on grasp point selection. J Mot Behav 43(6):427–432

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fikes TG, Klatzky RL, Lederman SJ (1994) Effects of object texture on precontact movement time in human prehension. J Mot Behav 26(4):325–332

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goodale MA, Meenan JP, Bülthoff HH, Nicolle DA, Murphy KJ, Racicotm 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 

  • Harris CM, Wolpert DM (1998) Signal-dependent noise determines motor planning. Nature 394:780–784

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hesse C, de Grave DD, Franz VH, Brenner E, Smeets JBJ (2008) Planning movements well in advance. Cogn Neuropsychol 27(7–8):985–995

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang HJ, Kram R, Ahmed AA (2012) Reduction of metabolic cost during motor learning of arm reaching dynamics. J Neurosci 32(6):2182–2190

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kistemaker DA, Wong JD, Gribble PL (2010) The Central nervous system does not minimize energy cost in arm movements. J Neurophysiol 104:2985–2994

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Milgram P (1987) A spectacle-mounted liquid-crystal tachistoscope. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 19(5):449–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulignan Y, Frak VG, Toni I, Jeannerod M (1997) Influence of object position and size on human prehension movements. Exp Brain Res 114:226–234

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roby-Brami A, Bennis N, Mokhtari M, Baraduc P (2000) Hand orientation for grasping depends on the direction of the reaching movement. Brain Res 869:121–129

    Article  CAS  PubMed  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 

  • Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (1999) A new view on grasping. Mot Control 3:237–271

    CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Taniai Y, Nishii J (2008) Optimality of reaching movements based on energetic cost under the influence of signal-dependent noise. In: Ishikawa M, Doya K, Miyamoto H, Yamakawa T (eds) Neural information processing. Springer, Berlin, pp 1091–1099

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Todorov E (2004) Optimality principles in sensorimotor control. Nat Neurosci 7(9):907–915

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vanrenterghem J, Bobbert MF, Casius LJ, De Clercq D (2008) Is energy expenditure taken into account in human sub-maximal jumping?—A simulation study. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 18:108–115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Voudouris D, Brenner E, Schot WD, Smeets JBJ (2010) Does planning a different trajectory influence the choice of grasp points? Exp Brain Res 206:15–24

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Voudouris D, Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (2012) Do humans prefer to see their grasping points? J Mot Behav 44(4):295–304

    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

    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

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a postgraduate fellowship to VC Paulun granted by the Justus-Liebig University of Gießen and by the DFG International Research Training Group IRTG 1901 “The Brain in Action—BrainAct”.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vivian C. Paulun.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Paulun, V.C., Kleinholdermann, U., Gegenfurtner, K.R. et al. Center or side: biases in selecting grasp points on small bars. Exp Brain Res 232, 2061–2072 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-014-3895-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-014-3895-z

Keywords

Navigation