Preserved obstacle avoidance during reaching in patients with left visual neglect

We asked 12 patients with left visual neglect to bisect the gap between two cylinders or to reach rapidly between them to a more distal target zone. Both tasks demanded a motor response but these responses were quite different in nature. The bisection response was a communicative act whereby the patient indicated the perceived midpoint. The reaching task carried no imperative to bisect the gap, only to maintain a safe distance from either cylinder while steering to the target zone. Optimal performance on either task could only be achieved by reference to the location of both cylinders. Our analysis focused upon the relative influence of the left and right cylinders on the lateral location of the response. In the bisection task, all neglect patients showed qualitatively the same asymmetry, with the left cylinder exerting less influence than the right. In the reaching task, the neglect group behaved like normal subjects, being influenced approximately equally by the two cylinders. This was true for all bar two of the patients, who showed clear neglect in both tasks. We conclude that the visuomotor processing underlying obstacle avoidance during reaching is preserved in most patients with left visual neglect. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Avoidance of obstacles in the absence of visual awareness

The spatial character of our reaching movements is extremely sensitive to potential obstacles in the workspace. We recently found that this sensitivity was retained by most patients with left visual neglect when reaching between two objects, despite the fact that they tended to ignore the leftward object when asked to bisect the space between them. This raises the possibility that obstacle avoidance does not require a conscious awareness of the obstacle avoided. We have now tested this hypothesis in a patient with visual extinction following right temporoparietal damage. Extinction is an attentional disorder in which patients fail to report stimuli on the side of space opposite a brain lesion under conditions of bilateral stimulation. Our patient avoided obstacles during reaching, to exactly the same degree, regardless of whether he was able to report their presence. This implicit processing of object location, which may depend on spared superior parietal-lobe pathways, demonstrates that conscious awareness is not necessary for normal obstacle avoidance.

Developmental changes in the response to obstacles during prehension

Adults are proficient at reaching to grasp objects of interest in a cluttered workspace. The issue of concern, obstacle avoidance, was studied in 3 groups of young children aged 11-12, 9-10, and 7-8 years (n = 6 in each) and in 6 adults aged 18-24 years. Adults slowed their movements and decreased their maximum grip aperture when an obstacle was positioned close to a target object (the effect declined as the distance between target and obstacle increased). The children showed the same pattern, but the magnitude of the effect was quite different. In contrast to the adults, the obstacle continued to have a large effect when it was some distance from the target (and provided no physical obstruction to movement).