title: Does bimanual grasping of the Müller-Lyer illusion provide evidence for a functional segregation of dorsal and ventral streams?
abstract: Studies claiming a differential processing of visual illusions for perception and action have been subjected to many challenges. One criticism is that attentional demands were mismatched between the perception and action tasks. Dewar and Carey (2006) reexamined this argument by comparing bimanual grasping to bimanual size estimation and concluded that manual size estimation (ManEst) was affected by the illusion to a greater extent than grasping, supporting the case for two functionally distinct streams of visual processing. We tested whether this result may be due to their use of closed loop visual conditions by replicating their study under both closed and open loop conditions. We found that the difference in illusion effects between grasping and ManEst disappeared under open loop conditions, indicating that Dewar and Carey's findings can be explained by the availability of visual feedback and not a perception/action dissociation. We also discuss potential shortcomings of bimanual designs.
authors.affiliation: Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. rachel.foster@uni-hamburg.de
authors.forename: Rachel M
authors.initials: RM
authors.lastname: Foster
authors.forename: Urs
authors.initials: U
authors.lastname: Kleinholdermann
authors.forename: Silke
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Leifheit
authors.forename: Volker H
authors.initials: VH
authors.lastname: Franz
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D005260:Female; D007839:Functional Laterality; D018737:Hand Strength / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D007088:Illusions / Q000502:physiology*; D008297:Male; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual / Q000502:physiology*; D010775:Photic Stimulation; D011597:Psychomotor Performance / Q000502:physiology*; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D014795:Visual Pathways / Q000502:physiology*; D055815:Young Adult