File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary
  • Bookmarks:
    • CiteULike: 1
  • Appears in Collections:

Article: The effect of the “rod-and-frame” illusion on grip planning in a sequential object manipulation task

TitleThe effect of the “rod-and-frame” illusion on grip planning in a sequential object manipulation task
Authors
KeywordsBiomedicine
Neurosciences
Neurology
Issue Date2007
PublisherSpringer Berlin / Heidelberg
Citation
Experimental Brain Research, 2007, v. 185, n. 1, p. 53-62 How to Cite?
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/147090
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.057
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.140
ISI Accession Number ID
References

Aglioti S, DeSouza JFX, Goodale MA (1995) Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Curr Biol 5(6):679–685 doi: 10.1016/S0960-9822(95)00133-3

Carey DP (2001) Do action systems resist visual illusions? Trends Cogn Sci 5(3):109–113 doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01592-8

Cohen RG, Rosenbaum DA (2004) Where grasps are made reveals how grasps are planned: generation and recall of motor plans. Exp Brain Res 157:486–495 doi: 10.1007/s00221-004-1862-9

Danckert JA, Sharif N, Haffenden AM, Schiff KC, Goodale MA (2002) A temporal analysis of grasping in the Ebbinghaus illusion: planning versus online control. Exp Brain Res 144:275–280 doi: 10.1007/s00221-002-1073-1

DiLorenzo JR, Rock I (1982) The rod-and-frame effect as a function of the righting of the frame. J Exp Psychol Human 8(4):536–546 doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.8.4.536

Dyde RT, Milner AD (2002) Two illusions of perceived orientations: one fools all of the people some of the time; the other fools all of the people all of the time. Exp Brain Res 144:518–527 doi: 10.1007/s00221-002-1065-1

Franz VH (2001) Action does not resist visual illusions. Trends Cogn Sci 5(11):457–459 doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01772-1

Gentilucci M, Negrotti A, Gangitano M (1997) Planning an action. Exp Brain Res 115:116–128 doi: 10.1007/PL00005671

Glover S (2002) Visual illusions affect planning but not control. Trends Cogn Sci 6(7):288–292 doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01920-4

Glover S, Dixon P (2002) Semantics affect the planning but not control of grasping. Exp Brain Res 146:383–387 doi: 10.1007/s00221-002-1222-6

Glover S, Dixon P, Castiello U, Rushworth MFS (2005) Effects of an orientation illusion on motor performance and motor imagery. Exp Brain Res 166:17–22 doi: 10.1007/s00221-005-2328-4

Goodale MA, Milner AD (2004) Plans for action. Behav Brain Sci 27(1):37–40 doi: 10.1017/S0140525X04340021

Haffenden AM, Goodale MA (1998) The effect of pictorial illusion on prehension and perception. J Cogn Neurosci 10(1):122–136 doi: 10.1162/089892998563824

Johnson-Frey SH, McCartney ME, Keen R (2004) Reaching beyond spatial perception: effects of intended future actions on visually guided prehension. Vis Cogn 11(2/3):371–399 doi: 10.1080/13506280344000329

Kelso JAS, Buchanan JJ, Murata T (1994) Multifunctionality and switching in the coordination dynamics of reaching and grasping. Hum Mov Sci 13:63–94 doi: 10.1016/0167-9457(94)90029-9

Mendoza JE, Elliott D, Meegan DV, Lyons JL, Welsh TN (2006) The effect of the Müller–Lyer Illusion on the planning and control of manual aiming movements. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 32(2):413–422 doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.2.413

Meulenbroek RGJ, Rosenbaum DA, Jansen C, Vaughan J, Vogt S (2001) Multijoint grasping movements Simulated and observed effects of object location, object size, and initial aperture. Exp Brain Res 138:219–234 doi: 10.1007/s002210100690

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

Rosenbaum DA, Vaughan J, Barnes HJ, Jorgensen MJ (1992) Time course of movement planning: selection of handgrips for object manipulation. J Exp Psychol Learn 18(5):1058–1073 doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.18.5.1058

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

Rosenbaum DA, Meulenbroek RJ, Vaughan J, Jansen C (2001) Posture-based motion planning: applications to grasping. Psychol Rev 108(4):709–734 doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.709

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

Smeets JBJ, Brenner E, de Grave DDJ, Cuijpers RH (2002) Illusions in action: consequences of inconsistent processing of spatial attributes. Exp Brain Res 147:135–144 doi: 10.1007/s00221-002-1185-7

Steenbergen B, Marteniuk RG, Kalbfleisch LE (1995). Achieving coordination in prehension: Joint freezing and postural contributions. J Motor Behav 27:333-348 doi: 10.1080/00222895.1995.9941722

Steenbergen B, Hulstijn W, Dortmans S (2000) Constraints on grip selection in cerebral palsy. Minimising discomfort Exp Brain Res 134:385–397 doi: 10.1007/s002210000458

Van Doorn H, Van der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJP (2007) Grasping the Müller–Lyer illusion: the contributions of vision for perception in action. Neuropsychologia 45(8):1939–1947 doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.11.008

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorJohn van der Kampen_US
dc.contributor.authorBert Steenbergenen_US
dc.contributor.authorCéline Crajéen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-05-25T07:50:35Z-
dc.date.available2012-05-25T07:50:35Z-
dc.date.issued2007en_US
dc.identifier.citationExperimental Brain Research, 2007, v. 185, n. 1, p. 53-62en_US
dc.identifier.issn0014-4819en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/147090-
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSpringer Berlin / Heidelbergen_US
dc.relation.ispartofExperimental Brain Researchen_US
dc.rightsSpringer-Verlagen_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong Licenseen_US
dc.subjectBiomedicineen_US
dc.subjectNeurosciencesen_US
dc.subjectNeurologyen_US
dc.titleThe effect of the “rod-and-frame” illusion on grip planning in a sequential object manipulation tasken_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://www.springerlink.com/link-out/?id=2104&code=T44632R6X61Q4869&MUD=MPen_US
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_versionen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00221-007-1130-xen_US
dc.identifier.pmid17909769-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-38649113621en_US
dc.relation.referencesAglioti S, DeSouza JFX, Goodale MA (1995) Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Curr Biol 5(6):679–685en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/S0960-9822(95)00133-3en_US
dc.relation.referencesCarey DP (2001) Do action systems resist visual illusions? Trends Cogn Sci 5(3):109–113en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01592-8en_US
dc.relation.referencesCohen RG, Rosenbaum DA (2004) Where grasps are made reveals how grasps are planned: generation and recall of motor plans. Exp Brain Res 157:486–495en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/s00221-004-1862-9en_US
dc.relation.referencesDanckert JA, Sharif N, Haffenden AM, Schiff KC, Goodale MA (2002) A temporal analysis of grasping in the Ebbinghaus illusion: planning versus online control. Exp Brain Res 144:275–280en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/s00221-002-1073-1en_US
dc.relation.referencesDiLorenzo JR, Rock I (1982) The rod-and-frame effect as a function of the righting of the frame. J Exp Psychol Human 8(4):536–546en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/0096-1523.8.4.536en_US
dc.relation.referencesDyde RT, Milner AD (2002) Two illusions of perceived orientations: one fools all of the people some of the time; the other fools all of the people all of the time. Exp Brain Res 144:518–527en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/s00221-002-1065-1en_US
dc.relation.referencesFranz VH (2001) Action does not resist visual illusions. Trends Cogn Sci 5(11):457–459en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01772-1en_US
dc.relation.referencesGentilucci M, Negrotti A, Gangitano M (1997) Planning an action. Exp Brain Res 115:116–128en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/PL00005671en_US
dc.relation.referencesGlover S, Dixon P (2001a) The role of vision in the on-line correction of illusion effects on action. Can J Exp Psychol 55(2):96–103en_US
dc.relation.referencesGlover SR, Dixon P (2001b) Dynamic illusion effects in a reaching task: evidence for separate visual representations in the planning and control of reaching. J Exp Psychol Human 27(3):560–572en_US
dc.relation.referencesGlover S (2002) Visual illusions affect planning but not control. Trends Cogn Sci 6(7):288–292en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01920-4en_US
dc.relation.referencesGlover S, Dixon P (2002) Semantics affect the planning but not control of grasping. Exp Brain Res 146:383–387en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/s00221-002-1222-6en_US
dc.relation.referencesGlover S (2004) Separate visual representations in the planning and control of action. Behav Brain Sci 27:3–78en_US
dc.relation.referencesGlover S, Dixon P, Castiello U, Rushworth MFS (2005) Effects of an orientation illusion on motor performance and motor imagery. Exp Brain Res 166:17–22en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/s00221-005-2328-4en_US
dc.relation.referencesGoodale MA, Milner AD (1992) Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends Cogn Sci 15(1):20–25en_US
dc.relation.referencesGoodale MA, Milner AD (2004) Plans for action. Behav Brain Sci 27(1):37–40en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1017/S0140525X04340021en_US
dc.relation.referencesHaffenden AM, Goodale MA (1998) The effect of pictorial illusion on prehension and perception. J Cogn Neurosci 10(1):122–136en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1162/089892998563824en_US
dc.relation.referencesJackson SR, Shaw A (2000) The ponzo illusion affects grip-force but not grip-aperture scaling during prehension movements. J Exp Psychol Human 26:418–423en_US
dc.relation.referencesJohnson-Frey SH, McCartney ME, Keen R (2004) Reaching beyond spatial perception: effects of intended future actions on visually guided prehension. Vis Cogn 11(2/3):371–399en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1080/13506280344000329en_US
dc.relation.referencesKelso JAS, Buchanan JJ, Murata T (1994) Multifunctionality and switching in the coordination dynamics of reaching and grasping. Hum Mov Sci 13:63–94en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/0167-9457(94)90029-9en_US
dc.relation.referencesMarteniuk RG, MacKenzie CL, Jeannerod M (1987) Constraints on Human arm movement trajectories. Can J Psychol 41:365–378en_US
dc.relation.referencesMendoza JE, Elliott D, Meegan DV, Lyons JL, Welsh TN (2006) The effect of the Müller–Lyer Illusion on the planning and control of manual aiming movements. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 32(2):413–422en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.2.413en_US
dc.relation.referencesMeulenbroek RGJ, Rosenbaum DA, Jansen C, Vaughan J, Vogt S (2001) Multijoint grasping movements Simulated and observed effects of object location, object size, and initial aperture. Exp Brain Res 138:219–234en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/s002210100690en_US
dc.relation.referencesRosenbaum DA, Jorgensen MJ (1992) Planning macroscopic aspects of manual control. Hum Mov Sci 11:61–69en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/0167-9457(92)90050-Len_US
dc.relation.referencesRosenbaum DA, Vaughan J, Barnes HJ, Jorgensen MJ (1992) Time course of movement planning: selection of handgrips for object manipulation. J Exp Psychol Learn 18(5):1058–1073en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/0278-7393.18.5.1058en_US
dc.relation.referencesRosenbaum DA, van Heugten CM, Caldwell GE (1996) From cognition to biomechanics and back: The en-state comfort effect and the middle-is-faster effect. Acta Psychol 94:59–85en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/0001-6918(95)00062-3en_US
dc.relation.referencesRosenbaum DA, Meulenbroek RJ, Vaughan J, Jansen C (2001) Posture-based motion planning: applications to grasping. Psychol Rev 108(4):709–734en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.709en_US
dc.relation.referencesShort MW, Cauraugh JH (1999) Precision and the end-state comfort effect. Acta Psychol 100:243–252en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/S0001-6918(98)00020-1en_US
dc.relation.referencesSmeets JBJ, Brenner E (1995) Perception and action are based on the same visual information: distinction between position and velocity. J Exp Psychol Hum 21(1):19–31en_US
dc.relation.referencesSmeets JBJ, Brenner E, de Grave DDJ, Cuijpers RH (2002) Illusions in action: consequences of inconsistent processing of spatial attributes. Exp Brain Res 147:135–144en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/s00221-002-1185-7en_US
dc.relation.referencesSteenbergen B, Marteniuk RG, Kalbfleisch LE (1995). Achieving coordination in prehension: Joint freezing and postural contributions. J Motor Behav 27:333-348en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1080/00222895.1995.9941722en_US
dc.relation.referencesSteenbergen B, Hulstijn W, Dortmans S (2000) Constraints on grip selection in cerebral palsy. Minimising discomfort Exp Brain Res 134:385–397en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/s002210000458en_US
dc.relation.referencesVan Doorn H, Van der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJP (2007) Grasping the Müller–Lyer illusion: the contributions of vision for perception in action. Neuropsychologia 45(8):1939–1947en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.11.008en_US
dc.relation.referencesBeh HC, Wenderoth PM (1971) The effect of variation of frame shape on the angular function of the rod-and-frame illusion. Percept Psychophys 11:35–37en_US
dc.relation.referencesDijkerman HC, Schindler RD, McIntosh RD, Nijboer TCW, Milner AD (2003) Choosing between alternative wrist postures: action planning needs perception. Congress of European Neuropsychological Societies, Modena, Italyen_US
dc.relation.referencesFranz VH, Scharnowski F, Gegenfurntner KR (2005) Illusion effects on grasping are temporally constant not dynamic. J Exp Psychol Human 313(6):1359–1378en_US
dc.relation.referencesMilner AD, Goodale MA (1995) The visual brain in action. Oxford University Press, New Yorken_US
dc.relation.referencesRosenbaum DA, Vaughan J, Jorgensen MJ, Barnes HJ, Steward E (1993) Plans for object manipulation. In: Myer DE, Kornblum S (eds) Attention and performance, vol 14. MIT, Cambridge, pp 803–820en_US
dc.identifier.volume185en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.spage53en_US
dc.identifier.epage62en_US
dc.identifier.eissn1432-1106en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000252691000006-
dc.description.otherSpringer Open Choice, 25 May 2012en_US
dc.identifier.citeulike8413572-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats