VISION AND HAPTICS

185 Pages·2015·2.34 MB·English

University of Lethbridge Research Repository
OPUS https://opus.uleth.ca
Theses Arts and Science, Faculty of
Stone, Kayla D.
2015
Vision and haptics : how sensorimotor
interactions influence grasping
Department of Neuroscience
https://hdl.handle.net/10133/3746
Downloaded from OPUS, University of Lethbridge Research Repository
VISION AND HAPTICS:
HOW SENSORIMOTOR INTERACTIONS INFLUENCE GRASPING

KAYLA D. STONE
B.Sc. (Psychology), University of Lethbridge, 2013

A Thesis
Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies
of the University of Lethbridge
in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree

[MASTER OF SCIENCE]

Department of Neuroscience
University of Lethbridge
LETHBRIDGE, ALBERTA, CANADA

© Kayla D. Stone, 2015
VISION AND HAPITCS:
HOW SENSORIMOTOR INTERACTIONS INFLUENCE GRASPING

KAYLA D. STONE

Date of Defense: July 10, 2015

Claudia Gonzalez Associate Professor PhD
Supervisor

Jon Doan Associate Professor PhD
Thesis Examination Committee Member

Robbin Gibb Associate Professor PhD
Thesis Examination Committee Member

Sergio Pellis Professor PhD
Thesis Examination Committee Member

David Euston Assistant Professor PhD
Chair, Thesis Examination Committee

ii
Dedication

For my parents, who have always encouraged me to follow my passion

iii
ABSTRACT

The purpose of this thesis was to investigate the sensory contributions to hand preference
for grasping. While numerous studies have investigated this preference for visually-
guided grasping (a left-hemisphere specialization), very few have documented it during
haptically-guided actions (a right-hemisphere specialization). In a series of four studies,
participants (healthy adults, congenitally blind, and children) were asked to replicate 3D-
block models from a tabletop of blocks while the hand used for grasping was recorded.
Overall the results showed a right-hand preference for grasping independent of age and
visual experience (but not sensory modality). Haptics played a modest, yet significant,
role in modulating hand preference, as there was a significant reduction in right-hand use
in the absence of vision (i.e. during haptically-guided grasping). Because the left hand
was never used more than 50% of the time, these findings support the theory of a default
right-hand/left-hemisphere specialization for grasping that is modulated by haptics.

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to start by thanking my supervisor, Claudia. Thank you for being
such a wonderful mentor and friend. Your patience, wisdom, and unwavering support has
been pivotal in my passion to pursue research. You have never failed to surprise,
challenge, or entertain me. I feel fortunate to have had such an incredible supervisor.
I also extend sincere gratitude to my committee members: Dr. Doan, Dr. Gibb,
and Dr. Pellis. Thank you for your feedback and interesting questions throughout my
Master’s. Your knowledge and expertise is invaluable.
To all of my lab mates in the Brain in Action lab: thank you for your help with my
experiments, editing my work, and simply being my best friends. Thank you to my office
mate, Jason, for hiding silly surprises around the office over the last two years and
sharing your knowledge about statistics, grammar, and dying grass.
Many thanks to the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of
Canada (NSERC) and the University of Lethbridge for funding my project.
Finally, I would like to thank my family and my boyfriend, Chase. Thank you for
loving and supporting me unconditionally. Mom and Dad, I can never repay you for the
immense amount of emotional and financial support you’ve given me over the years. I
will be forever grateful. Scott, thank you for the hours you’ve spent explaining MATLAB
to me and helping me with every other technology-related incident in my life. Chase,
thank you for being the light in my life every day. It is because of all of you that I feel
confident going in the direction of my dreams.

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter page
Thesis Examination Committee ii
Dedication iii
Abstract iv
Acknowledgements v
1. Preface 1
2. The Contributions of Vision and Touch to Grasping 6
2.1. Introduction 8
2.2. Sensory contributions to hand preference for reaching and grasping: 9
Evidence from healthy and neuropsychological populations
2.2.1. Left-hemisphere specialization from visually-guided actions 10
2.2.1.1. Evidence from neuropsychological studies 10
2.2.1.2. Evidence from psychophysics and kinematic studies 11
2.2.1.3. Evidence from neuroimaging studies 14
2.2.1.4. Evidence from natural grasping studies 15
2.2.2. Right-hemisphere specialization for haptic processing 17
2.2.2.1. Evidence from neuropsychological studies 18
2.2.2.2. Evidence from studies involving psychophysics and 19
imaging techniques
2.2.2.3. Evidence from natural grasping studies 21
2.3. Sensory contributions to hand preference for reaching and grasping: 24
Evidence from sensory-deprived populations
2.3.1. Congenitally Blind individuals 24
2.3.2. Deafferented individuals 28
2.4. Sensory contributions to hand preference for reaching and grasping: 31
Evidence from developmental studies
2.4.1. Development of right-hand preference for grasping 31
2.4.2. Development of left-hand preference for haptic processing 32
2.5. Integration of hemispheric specialization s 36
2.5.1. Evidence from behavioural studies 36
2.5.2. Evidence from neuroimaging studies 38
2.5.3. Sensory integration for grasping 40
2.5.4. A model of how visuo-haptic integration influences hand 42
preference for grasping
2.6. Conclusion 45
References 46
3. Limitations, future directions, and implications 75
References 85
Appendices
1. Grasping with the Eyes of yourH ands: Hapsis and Vision 88
Modulate Hand Preference
2. Grasping Without Sight: Insights from the Congenitally Blin d 108
3. Manual Preferences for Visually- and Haptically-guided Grasping 133
4. Sensory Modulation of Hand Preference For Grasping inC hildren 154
vi
5. Waterloo/Edinburg Handedness Questionnaire 172
6. Copyright permissions 175

vii
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure no. page

Chapter 1. The Contributions of Vision and Touch to Grasping
Figure 1. The block-building task under three different sensory conditions 23

viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ANOVA Analysis of Variance
aIPS anterior intraparietal sulcus
BA Brodmann’s area
CB congenitally blind
EEG electroencephalography
hMT+ human middle temporal area
fMRI functional magnetic resonance imaging
LOC lateral occipital cortex
NMR nuclear magnetic resonance
PPC posterior parietal cortex
SI primary somatosensory cortex
SII secondary somatosensory cortex
TFD temporary functional deafferentation
TMS transcranial magnetic stimulation
ix