The destination defines the journey: an examination of the kinematics of hand-to-mouth movements

Motor invariants in action execution and perception

The nervous system is sensitive to statistical regularities of the external world and forms internal models of these regularities to predict environmental dynamics. Given the inherently social nature of human behavior, being capable of building reliable predictive models of others' actions may be essential for successful interaction. While social prediction might seem to be a daunting task, the study of human motor control has accumulated ample evidence that our movements follow a series of kinematic invariants, which can be used by observers to reduce their uncertainty during social exchanges. Here, we provide an overview of the most salient regularities that shape biological motion, examine the role of these invariants in recognizing others' actions, and speculate that anchoring socially-relevant perceptual decisions to such kinematic invariants provides a key computational advantage for inferring conspecifics' goals and intentions.

On the Neurocircuitry of Grasping: The influence of action intent on kinematic asymmetries in reach-to-grasp actions

Evidence from electrophysiology suggests that nonhuman primates produce reach-to-grasp movements based on their functional end goal rather than on the biomechanical requirements of the movement. However, the invasiveness of direct-electrical stimulation and single-neuron recording largely precludes analogous investigations in humans. In this review, we present behavioural evidence in the form of kinematic analyses suggesting that the cortical circuits responsible for reach-to-grasp actions in humans are organized in a similar fashion. Grasp-to-eat movements are produced with significantly smaller and more precise maximum grip apertures (MGAs) than are grasp-to-place movements directed toward the same objects, despite near identical mechanical requirements of the two subsequent (i.e., grasp-to-eat and grasp-to-place) movements. Furthermore, the fact that this distinction is limited to right-handed movements suggests that the system governing reach-to-grasp movements is asymmetric. We contend that this asymmetry may be responsible, at least in part, for the preponderance of right-hand dominance among the global population.

The left cerebral hemisphere may be dominant for the control of bimanual symmetric reach-to-grasp movements

Previous research has established that the left cerebral hemisphere is dominant for the control of continuous bimanual movements. The lateralisation of motor control for discrete bimanual movements, in contrast, is underexplored. The purpose of the current study was to investigate which (if either) hemisphere is dominant for discrete bimanual movements. Twenty-one participants made bimanual reach-to-grasp movements towards pieces of candy. Participants grasped the candy to either place it in their mouths (grasp-to-eat) or in a receptacle near their mouths (grasp-to-place). Research has shown smaller maximum grip apertures (MGAs) for unimanual grasp-to-eat movements than unimanual grasp-to-place movements when controlled by the left hemisphere. In Experiment 1, participants made bimanual symmetric movements where both hands made grasp-to-eat or grasp-to-place movements. We hypothesised that a left hemisphere dominance for bimanual movements would cause smaller MGAs in both hands during bimanual grasp-to-eat movements compared to those in bimanual grasp-to-place movements. The results revealed that MGAs were indeed smaller for bimanual grasp-to-eat movements than grasp-to-place movements. This supports that the left hemisphere may be dominant for the control of bimanual symmetric movements, which agrees with studies on continuous bimanual movements. In Experiment 2, participants made bimanual asymmetric movements where one hand made a grasp-to-eat movement while the other hand made a grasp-to-place movement. The results failed to support the potential predictions of left hemisphere dominance, right hemisphere dominance, or contralateral control.

Hear speech, change your reach: changes in the left-hand grasp-to-eat action during speech processing

Research has shown that the kinematic characteristics of right-hand movements change when executed during both speech production and processing. Despite the variety of prehension and manual actions used to examine this relationship, the literature has yet to examine potential movement effects using an action with a distinct kinematic signature: the hand-to-mouth (grasp-to-eat) action. In this study, participants performed grasp-to-eat and grasp-to-place actions in (a) a quiet environment and (b) while processing speech. Results during the quiet condition replicated the previous findings; consistently smaller grasp-to-eat (compared to grasp-to-place), maximum grip apertures appeared only when using the right hand. Interestingly, in the listen condition, smaller maximum grip apertures in the grasp-to-eat movement appeared in both the right and left hands, despite the fact that participants were right-handed. This paper addresses these results in relation with similar behaviour observed in children, and discusses implications for functional lateralization and neural organization.

Wait wait, don't tell me: Handedness questionnaires do not predict hand preference for grasping

Handedness questionnaires are a common screening tool in psychology and neuroscience, used whenever a participant's performance on a given task may conceivably be affected by their laterality. Two widely-used examples of such questionnaires are the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory and the Waterloo Handedness Questionnaire. Both instruments ask respondents to report their hand preference for performing a variety of common tasks (e.g., throwing a ball, or opening a drawer). Here we combined questions from the two instruments (E-WHQ; 22 questions total) and asked participants to report their preferred hand for each via a five-point scale. The purpose of this study was to determine whether responses on the E-WHQ are accurate, reliable, and/or predictive of hand-preference for a simple grasp-to-construct task. Regarding accuracy, handedness scores were 5% lower when participants used a scrambled response key versus a consistent one. Test-retest reliability of the questionnaire was weak, with any given inventory item eliciting a different response from 34% of respondents upon retesting. Neither was the E-WHQ predictively useful-although both left- and right-handers preferred their dominant hands, E-WHQ score did not correlate with overall percentage of dominant-hand grasps in either group. We conclude that the E-WHQ is unsuited for predicting hand preference for grasping.

Kinematics of ventrally mediated grasp-to-eat actions: right-hand advantage is dependent on dorsal stream input

Studies have suggested a left-hemisphere specialization for visually guided grasp-to-eat actions by way of task-dependent kinematic asymmetries (i.e., smaller maximum grip apertures for right-handed grasp-to-eat movements than for right-handed grasp-to-place movements or left-handed movements of either type). It is unknown, however, whether this left-hemisphere/right-hand kinematic advantage is reliant on the dorsal "vision-for-action" visual stream. The present study investigates the kinematic differences between grasp-to-eat and grasp-to place actions performance during closed-loop (i.e., dorsally mediated) and open-loop delay (i.e., ventrally mediated) conditions. Twenty-one right-handed adult participants were asked to reach to grasp small food items to (1) eat them, or (2) place them in a container below the mouth. Grasps were performed in both closed-loop and open-loop delay conditions, in separate sessions. We show that participants displayed the right-hand grasp-to-eat kinematic advantage in the closed-loop condition, but not in the open-loop delay condition. As no task-dependent kinematic differences were found in ventrally mediated grasps, we posit that the left-hemisphere/right-hand advantage is dependent on dorsal stream processing.

Evidence for the representation of movement kinematics in the discharge of F5 mirror neurons during the observation of transitive and intransitive actions

Mirror neurons (MirNs) are sensorimotor neurons that fire both when an animal performs a goal-directed action and when the same animal observes another agent performing the same or a similar transitive action. It has been claimed that the observation of intransitive actions does not activate MirNs in a monkey’s brain. Prompted by recent evidence indicating that the discharge of MirNs is modulated also by non-object-directed actions, we investigated thoroughly the efficacy of intransitive actions to trigger MirNs’ discharge. Using representational similarity analysis, we also studied whether the elements constituting the visual scene presented to the monkey during the observation of actions (both transitive and intransitive) are represented in the discharge of MirNs. For this purpose, the moving hand was modeled by its kinematics and the object by features of its geometry. We found that MirNs respond to the observation of both transitive and intransitive actions and that the discharge differences evoked by the observation of object- and non-object-directed actions are correlated more with the kinematic differences of these actions than with the differences of the objects’ features. These findings support the view that observed action kinematics contribute to action mirroring.

NEW & NOTEWORTHY Mirror neurons in the monkey brain are thought to respond exclusively to the observation of object-directed actions. Here, we show that mirror neurons also respond to the observation of intransitive actions and that the kinematics of the observed movements are represented in their discharge. This finding supports the view that mirror neurons provide also a kinematics-based representation of actions.

Handedness and Reach-to-Place Kinematics in Adults: Left-Handers Are Not Reversed Right-Handers

The primary goal of this study was to examine the relations between limb control and handedness in adults. Participants were categorized as left or right handed for analyses using the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory. Three-dimensional recordings were made of each arm on two reach-to-place tasks: adults reached to a ball and placed it into the opening of a toy (fitting task), or reached to a Cheerio inside a cup, which they placed on a designated mark after each trial (cup task). We hypothesized that limb control and handedness were related, and we predicted that we would observe side differences favoring the dominant limb based on the dynamic dominance hypothesis of motor lateralization. Specifically, we predicted that the dominant limb would be straighter and smoother on both tasks compared with the nondominant limb (i.e., right arm in right-handers and left arm in left-handers). Our results only partially supported these predictions for right-handers, but not for left-handers. When differences between hands were observed, the right hand was favored regardless of handedness group. Our findings suggest that left-handers are not reversed right-handers when compared on interlimb kinematics for reach-to-place tasks, and reaffirm that task selection is critical when evaluating manual asymmetries.