Pérez MJA

Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 385-390
PDF size: 89.97 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Catching a moving ball represents a paradigm to study visuomanual coordination; moreover, it can help in knowledge how the brain solves computational aspects of this coordination. Objective: The propose of this article was to provide a general perspective of main aspects in catching or interception of moving objects. Some essential concepts time-to-closure of spatial gaps in catching task are exposed, as soon as, the closing of gaps synchronously in this task. The role of visual aspects in catching is explained, both monocular and binocular vision have been importants in precision for timing a ball catching. Moreover, it is mentioned the identification of areas in temporal lobe, these are involved at the processing of objects’ movement by brain. Surrounding information is considered, because it provides an optic flow of ball into the environment. This paper also describes several researches over an internal model of Earth’s gravity. Studies found electromyography activity in some arm’s muscles before to ball-hand impact; this aspect indicates that preparation for catching involved cognitive inferences. When the subjects caught balls under Earth’s gravity and microgravity, also, the nervous system utilized an internal model to estimate time-to-contact of object in hand. The effort for to locate specific areas involved in catching have provided evidence of how brain’s vestibular cortex is implicated into processing of gravity’s effects in movement and visual motion. Conclusion: Finally, in future studies will hopefully elucidate controversies among the investigation fields that have been studying the phenomenon.

REFERENCES

1. Lacquaniti F, Maioli C. The role of preparation in tuning anticipatory and reflex responses during catching. J Neurosci 1989; 9: 134-48.

2. Lacquaniti F. Neural control of limb mechanics for visuomanual coordination. In: Wing AM, Haggard JR, Flanagan JR eds. Hand and Brain. San Diego: Academic Press; 1996, p. 213-37.

3. Lee DN. The optic flow field: the foundation of vision. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 1980; 290: 169-79.

4. Georgopoulos A. catching for real and catching for fun in ecological psychology focus on “Internal models of target motion: expected dynamics overrides measured kinematics in timing manual interceptions”. J Neurophysiol 2004; 91: 1455.

5. Lee DN. Guiding movement by coupling taus. Ecological Psychology 1998; 10: 221-50.

6. Lee DN, Craig CM, Grealy MA. Sensory and intrinsic coordination of movement. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 1999; 266: 2029-35.

7. Lee DN, Georgopoulos AP, Clark MJO, Craig CM, Port NL. Guiding contact by coupling the taus of gaps. Exp Brain Res 2001; 139: 151-9.

8. Brouwer AM, Brenner E, Smeets JBJ. When in behavioral data evidence for a control theory? tau-coupling revisited. Motor Control 2003; 7: 103-10.

9. Brenner E, Smeets JBJ, Lussanet MHE. Hitting moving targets: continuos control of the acceleration of the hand on the basis of the target’s velocity. Exp Brain Res 1998; 122: 467-74.

10. Servos P, Goodale MA. Monocular and binocular control of human interception movements. Exp Brain Res 1998; 119: 92-102.

11. Qian N. Binocular disparity and the perception of depth. Neuron 1997; 18: 359-68.

12. Rushton SK, Wann JP. Weighted combination of size and disparity: a computational model for timing a ball catch. Nat Neurosci 1999; 2: 186-90.

13. Craig CM, Delay D, Grealy MA, Lee DN. Guding the swing in golf putting. Nature 2000; 405: 295-6.

14. Tremblay L, Proteau L. Specificity of practice in a ball interception task. Can J Exp Psychol 2001; 55: 207-18.

15. Shaffer DM, McBeath MK, Roy WL, Krauchunas SM. A linear optical trayectory informs the filder where to run to the side to catch fly balls. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 2003; 29: 1244-50.

16. Dukelow SP, DeSouza JF, Culham JC, Van den Berg AV, Menon RS, Vilis T. Distinguishing subregions of the human MT+ complex using visual field and persuit eye movements. J Neurophysiol 2001; 86: 1991-2000.

17. Born RT, Bradley DC. Structure and function of visual area MT. Annu Rev Neurosci 2005; 28: 157-89.

18. Field D, Wann JP. Perceiving time to collision activates the sensoriomotor cortex. Curr Biol 2005; 15: 1-20.

19. McIntyre J, Zago M, Berthoz A, Lacquaniti F. Does the brain model Newton’s laws? Nat Neurosci 2001; 4: 693-4.

20. Zago M, Bosco G, Maffei V, Iosa M, Ivanenko YP, Lacquaniti F. Internal models of target motion: expected dynamics overrides measured kinematics in timing manual interceptions. J Neurophysiol 2004; 91: 1620-34.

21. Indovina I, Maffei V, Bosco G, Zago M, Macaluso E, Lacquaniti F. Representation of visual gravitational motion in the human vestibular cortex. Science 2005; 308: 416-19.

22. López-Moliner J, Maicha A, Estaún S. Perception of acceleration in motion-in-depth with only monocular and both monocular and binocular information. Psicológica 2003; 24: 93-108.