Umberto Castiello

The neuroscience of grasping

People have always been fascinated by the exquisite precision and flexibility of the human hand. When hand meets object, we confront the overlapping worlds of sensorimotor and cognitive functions. We reach for objects, grasp and lift them, manipulate them and use them to act on other objects. This review examines one of these actions — grasping. Recent research in behavioural neuroscience, neuroimaging and electrophysiology has the potential to reveal where in the brain the process of grasping is organized, but has yet to address several questions about the sensorimotor transformations that relate to the control of the hands.

Splitting focal attention

The study was based on the inverse relationship between the effect of attention on reaction time (RT) and the size of the area over which focal attention is allocated. Independent occurrence of this in 2 locations in the opposite hemifields would be evidence of attention splitting. In Experiment 1, in which the 2 locations were denoted by empty boxes, there was an inverse relationship between size of the stimulated box and RT. Experiment 2 replicated the finding with different stimulation conditions. In Experiment 3, no relationship was found between RT and length of a cuing line. In Experiment 4, in which attention was manipulated by central cues, there was an effect of box size on valid and neutral trials but not invalid trials. Observers could split focal attention and manipulate simultaneously 2 independent attentional foci on objects located in the opposite hemifields.

Grasping a fruit: selection for action.

This study used a natural task, with no emphasis placed on speeded responses, to investigate unconscious information processing. Using the ELITE system, a kinematic analysis was performed of the upper limb reach-to-grasp movement. Nine experiments explored how the presence of distractors affects the transport and grasp component of this movement. Experiment 1 showed that the kinematics for grasping apples, mandarins, cherries, and bananas were measurably different. Experiments 2A-D, 3, and 4 showed that these kinematics were not affected by the presence of nearby distractor fruits of either the same or a different kind. In Experiment 5, interference effects became evident when participants were required to perform a subsidiary task involving the distractor (counting the number of times a laterally placed fruit was illuminated). Experiment 6, requiring both grasping a target fruit and counting the number of times that this fruit was illuminated, revealed no interference effects. Taken together, these results suggest that selection for action does not involve substantial passive processing of distractors. However, dual-action processing of simultaneously presented objects does appear to involve automatic processing of even the task-irrelevant properties of the distractor.

Motor facilitation following action observation: A behavioural study in prehensile action

Previous research has shown that the observation of actions and the execution of actions activate common neural systems. More recently, we have presented data showing that action observation of prehension primes subsequent execution (Castiello, Lusher, Mari, Edwards, & Humphreys, 2002). In the current paper we examined action priming under conditions in which the size of the prime did not predict the size of the target (only 20% of trials were valid). We demonstrated reliable priming under these conditions, consistent with the effect occurring automatically. In addition, we show priming even when observers saw just the object rather than the object and a reaching action on the prime trial. We discuss the findings in relation to the role of mirror neurons and object affordances.

Reach to grasp: the natural response to perturbation of object size

This study assessed the reach to grasp movement and its adaptive response to a perturbation of object size. In blocked trials, subjects (n = 12) were instructed to reach 35 cm to grasp and lift a small- (0.7 cm) or large-diameter (8 cm) cylinder. Under an unconstrained condition (condition 1), no instructions as to the type of grasp to adopt were given. Subjects thus naturally used a precision grip (PG) for the small cylinder and whole hand prehension (WHP) for the large cylinder. Under condition 2, subjects were instructed to utilize a PG for grasps of both the large and small cylinders. For condition 3, the instruction was to use WHP irrespective of object size. Kinematic organization was determined with analysis of the recordings of active markers placed on the wrist, thumb, and three fingers. For condition 1 the results showed a temporal arrangement of both components (transport and manipulation) which differed from that of conditions 2 and 3. In perturbed trials, illumination shifted from the small to large cylinder or vice versa. With condition 1, subjects automatically switched from one grasp to another with no or little increase of movement duration. This was generally achieved by an earlier temporal setting of peak wrist deceleration. For conditions 2 and 3, where a change of aperture was required, movement duration was prolonged without adaptation of earlier transport component parameters. It is concluded that the adaptive responses to a change of distal patterning also affect the organization of the proximal component. Assessment of grasps constrained by instructions may lead to interpretations of central control of the reach to grasp movement which differ from those obtained by assessing more natural prehensile patterns.

Understanding Other People's Actions: Intention and Attention

This study investigated the extent to which observation of an action performed by a human actor or a robotic arm may kinematically prime the performance of an observer subsequently required to perform a similar action. In Experiment 1, an actor reached for a target presented in isolation or flanked by a distractor object. Subsequently, an observer was required to perform a similar action toward the target object, but always in the absence of the distractor. The kinematics of both the human actor and the observer were affected by the presence of the distractor. Unexpectedly, similar effects were found in the observers kinematics during the trials in which the actor was seated in front of the observer but no action was demonstrated (catch trials). Results from 4 subsequent experiments suggest that the motor intentions of the actor can be inferred by monitoring his or her gaze. To support this conclusion, results are discussed in terms of recent work spanning many disciplines involved in combining gaze direction and body movements.

An object for an action, the same object for other actions: effects on hand shaping.

Objects can be grasped in several ways due to their physical properties, the context surrounding the object, and the goal of the grasping agent. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the prior-to-contact grasping kinematics of the same object vary as a result of different goals of the person grasping it. Subjects were requested to reach toward and grasp a bottle filled with water, and then complete one of the following tasks: (1) Grasp it without performing any subsequent action; (2) Lift and throw it; (3) Pour the water into a container; (4) Place it accurately on a target area; (5) Pass it to another person. We measured the angular excursions at both metacarpal-phalangeal (mcp) and proximal interphalangeal (pip) joints of all digits, and abduction angles of adjacent digit pairs by means of resistive sensors embedded in a glove. The results showed that the presence and the nature of the task to be performed following grasping affect the positioning of the fingers during the reaching phase. We contend that a one-to-one association between a sensory stimulus and a motor response does not capture all the aspects involved in grasping. The theoretical approach within which we frame our discussion considers internal models of anticipatory control which may provide a suitable explanation of our results.

Toward You The Social Side of Actions

Humans spend most of their time interacting with other people. It is the motor organization subtending these social interactions that forms the main theme of this article. We review recent experimental studies testing whether it is possible to differentiate the kinematics of an action performed by an agent acting in isolation from the kinematics of the very same action performed within a social context. The results indicate that social context shapes action planning and that in the context of a social interaction, flexible online adjustments take place between partners. These observations provide novel insights on the social dimension of motor planning and control.

Measuring time to awareness.

THE timing of two simultaneous responses to one single visual event, namely the sudden subjective expansion of a real object occurring at the onset of a reaching movement, was measured in normal subjects. The motor response was represented by the earliest sign of correction in trajectory of the movement. The subjective report was represented by a vocal utterance that the subjects were instructed to emit when they became aware of the change in appearance of the object. The subjective report lagged the motor response by 150 ms. Control experiments ruled out a possible interference between the two responses. It is concluded that this temporal dissociation reflects a duality of neural pathways involved in processing object-related information.

The human temporal lobe integrates facial form and motion: evidence from fMRI and ERP studies.

Physiological studies in humans and monkeys indicate that the posterior temporal cortex is active when viewing the movements of others. Here we tested the premise that this region integrates form and motion information by presenting both natural and line-drawn displays of moving faces and motion controls where motion was continuously presented in the same part of the visual field. The cortex in and near the STS and on the fusiform gyrus (FG) responded to both types of face stimuli, but not to the controls, in a functional magnetic resonance imaging study in 10 normal subjects. The response in the STS to both types of facial motion was equal in magnitude, whereas in the FG the natural image of the face produced a significantly greater response than that of the line-drawn face. In a subsequent recording session, the electrical activity of the brain was recorded in the same subjects to the same activation task. Significantly larger event-related potentials (ERPs) to both types of moving faces were observed over the posterior temporal scalp compared to the motion controls at around 200 ms postmotion onset. Taken together, these data suggest that regions of temporal cortex actively integrate form and motion information-a process largely independent of low-level visual processes such as changes in local luminance and contrast.