Orienting the finger opposition space during prehension movements.
Two experiments are reported that examined the act of prehension when subjects were asked to grasp with their thumb and index finger pads an elongated object resting horizontally on a surface and placed at different orientations with respect to the subject. In Experiment 1, the pad opposition preferences were determined for the six angles of orientation examined. For angles of 90 degrees (object parallel to frontal plane) or less, no rotation of the wrist (pronation) was used; for angles 110 degrees or greater, pronation was systematically employed to reorient the finger opposition space. Only one angle, 100 degrees , produced any evidence of ambiguity in how to grasp the object: Approximately 60% of these grasps involved pronation and 40% did not. Using the foregoing grasp preference data, in Experiment 2 we examined the kinematics of the wrist and elbow trajectories during prehension movements directed at an object in different orientations. Movement time, time to peak acceleration, velocity, and deceleration were measured. No kinematic differences were observed when the object orientation either required (110 degrees ) or did not require (80 degrees ) a pronation. By contrast, if the orientation was changed at the onset of the movement, such that an unpredicted pronation had to be introduced to achieve the grasp, kinematics were affected: Movement time was increased, and the time devoted to deceleration was lengthened. These data are interpreted as evidence that when natural prehension occurs, pronation can be included in the motor plan without affecting the movement kinematics. When constraints are imposed on the movement execution as a consequence of a perturbation, however, the introduction of a pronation component requires kinematic rearrangement.
Stelmach
G E
GE
Vision et Motricité, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, U94, 16 Avenue Doyen Lépine 69500 Bron, France.
Castiello
U
U
Jeannerod
M
M