Bimanual prehension to a solitary target
| dc.contributor.advisor | Binsted, Gordon | en_US |
| dc.contributor.committeeMember | Saucier, Deborah M. | en_US |
| dc.contributor.committeeMember | Kelly, Debbie M. | en_US |
| dc.contributor.committeeMember | Gutwin, Carl | en_US |
| dc.creator | Clarke, Nicky | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2007-08-06T13:41:56Z | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2013-01-04T04:51:10Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2007-08-20T08:00:00Z | en_US |
| dc.date.available | 2013-01-04T04:51:10Z | |
| dc.date.created | 2007-08 | en_US |
| dc.date.issued | 2007-08-20 | en_US |
| dc.date.submitted | August 2007 | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | Grasping and functionally interacting with a relatively large or awkwardly shaped object requires the independent and cooperative coordination of both limbs. Acknowledging the vital role of visual information in successfully executing any prehensile movements, the present study aimed to clarify how well existing bimanual coordination models (Kelso et al, 1979; Marteniuk & Mackenzie, 1980) can account for bimanual prehension movements targeting a single end-point under varying visual conditions. We therefore, employed two experiments in which vision of the target object and limbs was available or unavailable during a bimanual movement in order to determine the affects of visual or memory-guided control (e.g. feedback vs. feed forward) on limb coordination.Ten right-handed participants (mean age = 24.5) performed a specific bimanual prehension movement targeting a solitary, static object under both visual closed loop (CL) and open loop 2s delay (OL2) conditions. Target location was varied while target amplitude remained constant. Kinematic data (bimanual coupling variables) indicated that regardless of target location, participants employed one of two highly successful movement execution strategies depending on visual feedback availability. During visual (CL) conditions participants employed a ‘dominant-hand initiation’ strategy characterized by a significantly faster right-hand (RH) reaction time and simultaneous hand contact with the target. In contrast, when no visual feedback was available (OL2), participants utilized a ‘search and follow’ strategy characterized by limb coupling at movement onset and a reliance on the dominant RH to contact the target ~62 ms before the left.In conclusion, the common goal parameters of targeting a single object with both hands are maintained and successfully achieved regardless of visual condition. Furthermore, independent programming of each limb is undeniably evident within the behaviours observed providing support for the neural cross-talk theory of bimanual coordination (Marteniuk & Mackenzie, 1980). Whether movement execution is visually (CL) or memory-guided (OL2) there is a clear preference of RH utilization possibly due to its dynamic and/or hemispheric advantages in controlling complex motor behaviours (Gonzalez et al., 2006). Therefore, we propose that bimanual grasping to a solitary target is possibly governed globally by a higher-level structure and successful execution is achieved via independent spinal pathway modulation of limbs. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10388/etd-08062007-134156 | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
| dc.subject | Bimanual coordination | en_US |
| dc.subject | Prehension | en_US |
| dc.subject | Grasping | en_US |
| dc.subject | Visual Feedback | en_US |
| dc.title | Bimanual prehension to a solitary target | en_US |
| dc.type.genre | Thesis | en_US |
| dc.type.material | text | en_US |
| thesis.degree.department | College of Kinesiology | en_US |
| thesis.degree.discipline | College of Kinesiology | en_US |
| thesis.degree.grantor | University of Saskatchewan | en_US |
| thesis.degree.level | Masters | en_US |
| thesis.degree.name | Master of Science (M.Sc.) | en_US |