Familiar size affects the perceived size and distance of real objects even with binocular vision.

Although the familiar size of real-world objects affects size and distance perception, evidence is mixed about whether this is the case when oculomotor cues are available. We examined the familiar size effect (FSE) on both size and distance perception for real objects under two viewing conditions with full or restricted oculomotor cues (binocular viewing, which provides vergence and accommodation cues, and monocular viewing through a 1-mm pinhole, which removes those cues). Familiar objects (a playing die versus a Rubik's cube) were manufactured in their typical (1.6-cm die and 5.7-cm Rubik's cube) and reverse (5.7-cm die and 1.6-cm Rubik's cube) sizes and shown at two distances (25 cm versus 91 cm) in isolation. Small near and large far objects subtended equal retinal angles. Participants provided manual estimates of perceived size and distance. For every combination of size and distance, Rubik's cubes were perceived as larger and farther than the dice, even during binocular viewing at near distances (<1 meter), when oculomotor cues are particularly strong. For size perception but not distance perception, the familiar size effect was significantly stronger under monocular pinhole viewing than binocular viewing. These results suggest that (1) familiar size affects the accuracy of perception, not just the speed; (2) the effect occurs even when oculomotor cues are available; and (3) size and distance perception are not perfectly yoked.

Grasping performance depends upon the richness of hand feedback.

Although visual feedback of the hand allows fast and accurate grasping actions, little is known about whether the nature of feedback of the hand affects performance. We investigated kinematics during precision grasping (with the index finger and thumb) when participants received different levels of hand feedback, with or without visual feedback of the target. Specifically, we compared performance when participants saw (1) no hand feedback; (2) only the two critical points on the index finger and thumb tips; (3) 21 points on all digit tips and hand joints; (4) 21 points connected by a "skeleton", or (5) full feedback of the hand wearing a glove. When less hand feedback was available, participants took longer to execute the movement because they allowed more time to slow the reach and close the hand. When target feedback was unavailable, participants took longer to plan the movement and reached with higher velocity. We were particularly interested in investigating maximum grip aperture (MGA), which can reflect the margin of error that participants allow to compensate for uncertainty. A trend suggested that MGA was smallest when ample feedback was available (skeleton and full hand feedback, regardless of target feedback) and when only essential information about hand and target was provided (2-point hand feedback + target feedback) but increased when non-essential points were included (21-point feedback). These results suggest that visual feedback of the hand affects grasping performance and that, while more feedback is usually beneficial, this is not necessarily always the case.

Disentangling Representations of Object and Grasp Properties in the Human Brain.

UNLABELLED: The properties of objects, such as shape, influence the way we grasp them. To quantify the role of different brain regions during grasping, it is necessary to disentangle the processing of visual dimensions related to object properties from the motor aspects related to the specific hand configuration. We orthogonally varied object properties (shape, size, and elongation) and task (passive viewing, precision grip with two or five digits, or coarse grip with five digits) and used representational similarity analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging data to infer the representation of object properties and hand configuration in the human brain. We found that object elongation is the most strongly represented object feature during grasping and is coded preferentially in the primary visual cortex as well as the anterior and posterior superior-parieto-occipital cortex. By contrast, primary somatosensory, motor, and ventral premotor cortices coded preferentially the number of digits while ventral-stream and dorsal-stream regions coded a mix of visual and motor dimensions. The representation of object features varied with task modality, as object elongation was less relevant during passive viewing than grasping. To summarize, this study shows that elongation is a particularly relevant property of the object to grasp, which along with the number of digits used, is represented within both ventral-stream and parietal regions, suggesting that communication between the two streams about these specific visual and motor dimensions might be relevant to the execution of efficient grasping actions. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: To grasp something, the visual properties of an object guide preshaping of the hand into the appropriate configuration. Different grips can be used, and different objects require different hand configurations. However, in natural actions, grip and object type are often confounded, and the few experiments that have attempted to separate them have produced conflicting results. As such, it is unclear how visual and motor properties are represented across brain regions during grasping. Here we orthogonally manipulated object properties and grip, and revealed the visual dimension (object elongation) and the motor dimension (number of digits) that are more strongly coded in ventral and dorsal streams. These results suggest that both streams play a role in the visuomotor coding essential for grasping.