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

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.

Reactive reaching and grasping on a humanoid: Towards closing the action-perception loop on the iCub

We propose a system incorporating a tight integration between computer vision and robot control modules on a complex, high-DOF humanoid robot. Its functionality is showcased by having our iCub humanoid robot pick-up objects from a table in front of it. An important feature is that the system can avoid obstacles - other objects detected in the visual stream - while reaching for the intended target object. Our integration also allows for non-static environments, i.e. the reaching is adapted on-the-fly from the visual feedback received, e.g. when an obstacle is moved into the trajectory. Furthermore we show that this system can be used both in autonomous and tele-operation scenarios.

Reducing the mapping between perception and action facilitates imitation

This study investigated two hypotheses regarding the mapping of perception to action during imitation. The first hypothesis predicted that as children’s cognitive capacities increase the tendency to map one goal and disregard others during imitation should decrease. This hypothesis was tested by comparing the performances of 168 4- to 7-year-olds in a gestural imitation task developed by Bekkering, Wohlschläger, and Gattis. The second hypothesis predicted that reducing the mapping between perception and action should reduce the demands on the cognitive resources of the child. This hypothesis was tested by creating a condition in which perception and action overlapped by sharing objects between experimenter and child. In three experimental conditions, an adult modelled four gestures, directed at either: 1) one of two sets of round stickers (proprietary objects); 2) the same location on the table, without any sticker (no objects); or 3) one set of round stickers, which were shared with the child (shared objects). The results confirmed both hypotheses. Four- and five-year-olds imitated less accurately when imitation involved mapping of both objects and movements (proprietary and shared objects) than when imitation involved mapping movements only (no objects). Seven-year-olds imitated accurately in all three conditions, demonstrating that increased cognitive capacity allowed them to map multiple goals from perception to action. Most importantly, reducing the mapping between perception and action in the shared objects condition facilitated imitation, specifically for the transitional group, 6-year-olds. We conclude that mapping between perception and action is not direct, but resembles mapping relations in analogical reasoning: cognitive processes mediate mapping from perception to action.

Understanding perception and action in sport:How can virtual reality technology help?

Although technology can facilitate improvements in performance by allowing us to understand, monitor and evaluate performance, improvements must ultimately come from within the athlete. The first part of this article will focus on understanding how perception and action relate to performance from two different theoretical viewpoints. The first will be predominantly a cognitive or indirect approach that suggests that expertise and decision-making processes are mediated by athletes accruing large knowledge bases that are built up through practice and experience. The second, and alternative approach, will advocate a more 'direct' solution, where the athlete learns to 'tune' into the relevant information that is embedded in their relationship with the surrounding environment and unfolding action. The second part of the article will attempt to show how emerging virtual reality technology is revealing new evidence that helps us understand elite performance. Possibilities of how new types of training could be developed from this technology will also be discussed. © 2014 Crown Copyright.

New methods for studying perception and action coupling

To study perception and action, Gibson advocated that “the laboratory must be like life” (Gibson, 1979, p. 3). In other words, the interactive relationship between an organism and his/her envi- ronment must be maintained so that the behavior observed in an experimental context mirrors, as closely as possible, the behavior observed in a realistic sport setting. The concept of repre- sentative design introduced by Brunswik in 1956 emphasized the need to have experimental tasks that allow the player to pick up perceptual information that specifies a property of the environment-actor system (Araújo et al., 2005; see also Chapter 24). In this chapter we will provide a brief overview of the methodologies used to study perception and action in sport and present, in some detail, the opportunities new methodologies such as immersive, interactive vir- tual reality can offer researchers in sport expertise.

Action preparation helps and hinders perception of action.

Several theories of the mechanisms linking perception and action require that the links are bidirectional, but there is a lack of consensus on the effects that action has on perception. We investigated this by measuring visual event-related brain potentials to observed hand actions while participants prepared responses that were spatially compatible (e.g., both were on the left side of the body) or incompatible and action type compatible (e.g., both were finger taps) or incompatible, with observed actions. An early enhanced processing of spatially compatible stimuli was observed, which is likely due to spatial attention. This was followed by an attenuation of processing for both spatially and action type compatible stimuli, likely to be driven by efference copy signals that attenuate processing of predicted sensory consequences of actions. Attenuation was not response-modality specific; it was found for manual stimuli when participants prepared manual and vocal responses, in line with the hypothesis that action control is hierarchically organized. These results indicate that spatial attention and forward model prediction mechanisms have opposite, but temporally distinct, effects on perception. This hypothesis can explain the inconsistency of recent findings on action-perception links and thereby supports the view that sensorimotor links are bidirectional. Such effects of action on perception are likely to be crucial, not only for the control of our own actions but also in sociocultural interaction, allowing us to predict the reactions of others to our own actions.

Visual perception of action categories and the "bowl-throw" decision in cricket.

Cricket umpires, cricket bowlers, and physical education students (who were knowledgeable about the rules of cricket), were shown 72 videotaped point-light displays of cricket deliveries with varying extents of elbow flexion such that they ranged from highly “bowl-like” to highly “throw-like”. The observers made a bowl-throw decision about each display, and the umpires and bowlers reported their confidence on a 5-point scale. The percentage of displays reported as a “bowl” was 59, 40, and 44 for the umpires, bowlers, and students respectively. Umpires made significantly more bowl decisions than both the bowlers and students, but there was no difference between the latter groups. Umpires were significantly more confident than the bowlers in both their bowl and throw decisions. Thus, in an experimental setting, with no apparent costs or benefits associated with their decision-makin, umpires “called” a bowler significantly less frequently for throwing than other knowledgeable observers. The procedures devised for this experiment demonstrate that psychophysical methods can be applied to the problem of discrete action-category nominations in sport (e.g., bowl or throw, walk or run).