Elsevier

Acta Psychologica

Volume 142, Issue 3, March 2013, Pages 394-401
Acta Psychologica

Did you see that? Dissociating advanced visual information and ball flight constrains perception and action processes during one-handed catching

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.01.014Get rights and content

Abstract

The integration of separate, yet complimentary, cortical pathways appears to play a role in visual perception and action when intercepting objects. The ventral system is responsible for object recognition and identification, while the dorsal system facilitates continuous regulation of action. This dual-system model implies that empirically manipulating different visual information sources during performance of an interceptive action might lead to the emergence of distinct gaze and movement pattern profiles. To test this idea, we recorded hand kinematics and eye movements of participants as they attempted to catch balls projected from a novel apparatus that synchronised or de-synchronised accompanying video images of a throwing action and ball trajectory. Results revealed that ball catching performance was less successful when patterns of hand movements and gaze behaviours were constrained by the absence of advanced perceptual information from the thrower's actions. Under these task constraints, participants began tracking the ball later, followed less of its trajectory, and adapted their actions by initiating movements later and moving the hand faster. There were no performance differences when the throwing action image and ball speed were synchronised or de-synchronised since hand movements were closely linked to information from ball trajectory. Results are interpreted relative to the two-visual system hypothesis, demonstrating that accurate interception requires integration of advanced visual information from kinematics of the throwing action and from ball flight trajectory.

Highlights

► We investigated the dual visual systems hypothesis during an interceptive action. ► With no visual information, gaze behaviours and hand kinematics changed significantly. ► Gaze was unaffected by a dissociation of advanced visual information and ball speed. ► Movement kinematics were linked to ball speed, not advanced perceptual information. ► Accurate interception requires integrating advanced and ball trajectory information.

Introduction

Performance of dynamic interceptive actions can seem deceptively simple, although they are inherently challenging because of restrictive spatio-temporal constraints on performance. For example, one-handed catching has severe spatial constraints since the optimal area for receiving the ball at the hand is very small — just above the palm and at the base of the metacarpal joints (Alderson, Sully, & Sully, 1974). Even when the catching hand is spatially-oriented in line with ball flight, a major problem is the timing of the grasp action. In previous work the margin of error for catching a ball travelling at a moderate speed of 10 ms 1 has been calculated at around ± 15 ms (Alderson et al., 1974). Because of these significant spatio-temporal constraints, anticipatory actions must be implemented so that the maximum aperture of the catching hand occurs before the ball contacts the hand surface and the metacarpophalangeal joints be prepared for stabilisation against impact.

These data indicated why the perception of advanced information, emerging prior to ball flight, is required to regulate action so that the hand reaches and grasps the ball at the appropriate time and place (Davids, Savelsbergh, Bennett, & Van der Kamp, 2002). Advanced information is exemplified by perception of the kinematics of an individual's actions used to project a ball (e.g., with a throw, kick or a hit) towards a catcher. Interceptive actions of this nature have attracted the interest of researchers because they offer insights into the tight integration between perceptual and action systems required for successful performance. Attempts to explain mechanisms that underpin successful performance of interceptive actions have revealed, using a video-based task, the importance of early perceptual information (e.g., Müller, Abernethy, & Farrow, 2006) and reliance on visual information from the target object for successful performance has been demonstrated in some previous research (e.g., Dessing, Oostwoud Wijdenes, Peper, & Beek, 2009).

Here we sought to integrate methodologies by using technology which allowed us to manipulate the relationship between early visual information and ball flight. This was because Van der Kamp, Rivas, Van Doorn, and Savelsbergh (2008) proposed that skilled performers can regulate interceptive actions by coupling them to different sources of information which become partially available at different times in dynamic performance contexts, such as prior to and after the point of ball projection. It is proposed that through this process, relatively skilled catchers become adept at taking advantage of the informational richness of environmental properties (perhaps from sources of advanced visual information from a thrower's hand or from the ball in flight) to functionally adapt their interceptive behaviours. Van der Kamp et al. (2008) emphasised the important role of two neuro-anatomically separate, but integrated, cortical visual pathways that underlie processes of perception and action, with implications for research designs in the study of dynamic interceptive actions. The two visual cortical pathways, functioning in an integrated manner, have been identified previously by behavioural neuroscientists (see Ungerleider and Mishkin, 1982, Goodale and Milner, 1992). The distinction between the systems rested in how visual information is utilised to regulate behaviour, under different task constraints. Perception in the ventral system tends to be slower, longer-lasting, and facilitates object recognition and identification, while the dorsal system uses instantaneous visual information for fast, continuous control of actions (Goodale, Jakobson, & Servos, 2000). In line with these ideas, we sought to investigate the presence of emergent adaptations to gaze and movement patterns during one-handed catching performance when availability and association between advanced visual information from a thrower and properties of ball flight were manipulated.

These ideas imply a complementary role for the two visual systems in an ecological model of anticipation in dynamic interceptive actions (Davids et al., 2002, Van der Kamp et al., 2008). During catching performance, engagement of the two cortical visual systems may occur along a continuum. Although both systems may remain active throughout a movement, the ventral system is primarily engaged with gaining knowledge about the performance environment and identifying action possibilities based on the action capabilities of an individual. For example, it could provide explicit perceptual recognition of an object, its relationship with other objects in the performance environment (location, trajectory and size, for example), and the individual projecting it (termed ‘vision for perception’). To successfully execute an interceptive action, however, the dorsal stream becomes dominant in the on-going control of movement (termed ‘vision for action’). It provides rapid and implicit information used to regulate an individual's responses to a moving object which has been identified for interception. The proposal of Van der Kamp et al. (2008) has significant implications for the study of interceptive actions: experimental and learning designs that overlook the nature of the specific contributions of each cortical visual system may fail to capture the integrated perceptual and behavioural processes that underlie successful performance (see also Withagen and van der Kamp, 2010, Pinder et al., 2011).

The dual visual system hypothesis has important implications for understanding previous research involving exclusion of visual information in advance of projection or from the target object, through spatial and temporal occlusion methods (e.g., Savelsbergh et al., 2005, Weissensteiner et al., 2008). It is possible that these experimental designs may have inadvertently engaged only the ventral cortical pathway, while overlooking the contribution of the dorsal system in successful interception of an object. Conversely, a number of studies have recorded the actions of individuals as they responded to the flight of a target object (e.g., Arzamarski et al., 2007, Mazyn et al., 2007). By occluding vision prior to the onset of ball flight these methods may have inadvertently engaged the dorsal system while ignoring the role of pre-flight visual information (from the ventral system) in object and event perception and movement planning. Ultimately, by failing to design task constraints which include all sources of information that can be used by an individual in performing an interceptive action, some previous studies may have provided an incomplete understanding of how the coupling of perception and action processes regulates interceptive behaviours.

To remediate this weakness in the literature, a number of recent investigations have implemented novel designs to empirically examine adaptive movement behaviours under task constraints which differ in visual information (e.g., Pinder et al., 2011, Pinder et al., 2009, Shim et al., 2005, Vignais et al., 2010). These studies have attempted to manipulate ecological performance constraints that: (i) primarily engage what could be thought of as ventral cortical pathways (e.g., participants responding to a video image of an action without actually being required to catch or hit a ball); (ii) those that engage dorsal pathways (e.g., participants responding to a ball emerging from a projection machine without advance visual information being presented); and (iii), those that maintain the performance context and movement requirements of an actual task (e.g., participants responding to an image of a pitcher/bowler, while actually being required to hit a ball). The data have generally revealed how movement timing, especially movement initiation, is impacted by the presence or absence of pre-ball projection (advanced) information while characteristics of an interceptive movement pattern adopted by participants (e.g., movement velocity) are constrained by the presence or absence of information from ball trajectory after projection. For example, Shim et al. (2005) demonstrated that tennis players responded later to balls projected by a machine compared to a live hitter. Evidence also suggests that gaze behaviours are influenced by the availability of visual information and the specific task constraints during performance of interceptive actions (Dicks, Button, & Davids, 2010). These studies have demonstrated differences in both perception and action when visual information changes. However, the methods used are limited in the extent to which they contribute to understanding the two visual system hypothesis in interceptive actions as they were unable to systematically manipulate the relationship between advanced information (prior to ball flight initiation) and the maintenance of ball trajectory information.

We sought to examine how the (de)synchronization of pre-release and ball flight information influenced performance of an interceptive timing task by comparing process tracing measures of performance (i.e., gaze behaviours, movement kinematics of interceptive actions) when different sources of visual information were available to participants through experimental manipulation. We used a novel technological design to compare task performance: a) when only ball flight information was available, b) when early perceptual information (i.e., movement kinematics of a standard video-projected image of a thrower) was synchronised with ball flight, and c), when a mismatch was created, attempting to de-synchronise information from the movement kinematics of a thrower's image and ball flight information. Specifying precise predictions based on this novel manipulation is somewhat difficult, but based on the conceptual framework developed by Van der Kamp et al. (2008), as well as previous research, we expected to observe a number of changes in process tracing measures with the inclusion of early perceptual information (a vs. b and c) as well as the matching (b) and mismatching (c) conditions. In the presence of video footage from an image of the thrower we expected to observe changes in gaze behaviours (i.e., greater search activities) as the image would provide allocentric information (e.g., direction, location, and timing of ball release) regarding the required interceptive action by participants. We also expected to observe some kinematic differences in performance between these conditions because the lack of perceptual information available for the timing of ball release might imply that the movement would tend to be initiated later (caused by a delay in coupling hand actions to ball flight information). As a result, movements would have to be speeded up to overcome the initial small delay. In contrast, we expected no differences in gaze behaviours because the throwing speeds were purposefully chosen to be very similar (i.e., we did not want participants to be consciously aware of even a slight difference between speeds which might skew their actions). We expected that kinematic differences would be closely linked to ball speed as opposed to differences in video images of throwing actions (i.e., since catching actions rely on metrically precise, egocentric information there would be no bias on catching behaviour). Finally, as the timing of movement onset represents an important demarcation point in the relative contribution of the ventral and dorsal streams, we expected movement onset to be more closely tied to video speed than ball speed (i.e., movement onset would likely be similar across video speeds because there were few detectable differences in throwing action).

Section snippets

Participants

Fourteen (N = 14; mean age: 23.4 ± 4.0 years) right-handed, males with normal or corrected-to-normal vision volunteered to participate in the study. Participants reported no specific training in one-handed catching beyond normal experiences in recreational sport. Ethical approval was provided for the study and all participants gave their informed consent prior to participation.

Ball projection machine

A custom-built apparatus was designed that allowed us to interface a tennis ball projection machine (Spinfire Pro 2) with a

Results

Catching accuracy was significantly affected by video condition, F(3, 39.05) = 14.42, p < .001, d = 2.11; 41.5% of balls were caught in the no-video condition, 55.9% were caught in V1, 65.1% were caught in V2, and 68.7% were caught in V3. Catching accuracy was also significantly affected by ball speed, F(2, 26.03) = 11.34, p < .001, d = 1.87; 67.5% were caught at S1, 59.1% at S2, and 46.9% at S3.

Table 1 presents the data for each video condition at the different ball speeds. Fixation count was

Discussion

Previous theorising on vision for object perception and vision for action has indicated that advanced information prior to ball release and from a ball's trajectory is essential for the successful performance of interceptive actions (Davids et al., 2002, Van der Kamp et al., 2008), although the relative influence that each source provides as a constraint on action is unknown. In this experiment we designed novel ball projection technology to assess changes in catchers' hand kinematics and gaze

Conclusion

Novel projection technology was used to demonstrate that one-handed catching performance is influenced by the availability of advanced visual information. Although alternative theoretical explanations may account for some of our findings (e.g., movement priming: Hesse, de Grave, Franz, Brenner, & Smeets, 2008), the results observed in this study generally provided behavioural support for the two-visual system hypothesis for regulation of interceptive action, proposed by Van der Kamp et al.

Acknowledgements

This project was funded with the support of the Victoria University Research Development Grant Scheme. The authors would like to thank Mr Ian Fairweather for his support in developing the projection technology used, Ms Shannon Barnes for her assistance with data collection, and all of the participants for their time.

References (27)

  • J. Dessing et al.

    Adaptations of lateral hand movements to early and late visual occlusion in catching

    Experimental Brain Research

    (2009)
  • M. Dicks et al.

    Examination of gaze behaviors under in situ and video simulation task constraints reveals differences in information pickup for perception and action

    Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics

    (2010)
  • J.J. Eckerle et al.

    The effect of load uncertainty on anticipatory muscle activity in catching

    Experimental Brain Research

    (2012)
  • Cited by (26)

    • “What needs to be seen”: An exploration into the visual anticipation behaviour of different skill-level football referees while observing long passes on-field

      2022, Human Movement Science
      Citation Excerpt :

      More specifically, elite referees allocated gaze more often and longer towards the ball during the first 10% (±270 ms) of the flight trajectory. Studies have shown that athletes who allocated gaze towards a target early and maintained it for a longer period were more successful in their ability to intercept the target (Causer et al., 2010; Panchuk et al., 2013). The early onset and tracking of a target enables the interceptor to gather accurate visual information about the position and speed of the target (Brenner & Smeets, 2017).

    • You Snooze, You Win? An Ecological Dynamics Framework Approach to Understanding the Relationships Between Sleep and Sensorimotor Performance in Sport

      2020, Sleep Medicine Clinics
      Citation Excerpt :

      Improved attunement and performance in expert baseball and cricket batters are related to more efficient gaze strategies that use anticipatory saccades to track ball flight and more stable head-tracking strategies.24,34,35 Furthermore, expert performers often attune to relevant stimuli, such as kinematics of opponents, in a more timely and anticipatory fashion, which allows them to initiate motor responses earlier and to modulate responses throughout the action.34,36 Increased movement variability has been observed early in motor responses of expert performers, suggesting that they are able to continuously modulate their motor responses based on updated perceptual information.24,37

    • Temporal and spatial occlusion of advanced visual information constrains movement (re)organization in one-handed catching behaviors

      2017, Acta Psychologica
      Citation Excerpt :

      Gaze data were coded frame-by-frame with fixations and tracking behavior recorded when the gaze cursor remained within 30 of visual angle on a location or a moving object for a minimum of three frames (100 ms; Vickers, 2007). Seven gaze locations were identified for all conditions: head, upper body, lower body, throwing arm/hand, release point (ball projection machine hole), ball, and other (based on previous research by Panchuk et al., 2013; Stone et al., 2014b, 2015). Fixation frequency was the total number of fixations made during each trial divided by total trial time.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text