Investigating how prior knowledge influences perception and action in developmental coordination disorder

Developmental coordination disorder (DCD) is characterised by a broad spectrum of difficulties in performing motor tasks. It has recently been proposed that a specific deficit in sensorimotor prediction and feedforward planning might underpin these motoric impairments. The purpose of this study was to use a naturalistic object lifting paradigm to examine whether deficits in sensorimotor prediction might underpin the broad spectrum of difficulties individuals with DCD face when interacting with objects in their environment. We recruited 60 children with probable DCD and 61 children without DCD and measured perceptions of heaviness and fingertip force rate application when interacting with objects which varied in their apparent weight. If deficits in sensorimotor prediction do underpin the broad-ranging motor difficulties seen in DCD, we would expect to see a reduced effect of visual size cues on fingertip force rates and illusory misperceptions of object heaviness. We found no evidence of differences in any metrics of sensorimotor prediction between children with (n = 46) and without DCD (n = 61). Furthermore, there was no correlation between any metrics of sensorimotor prediction and motor performance (as assessed by the standard diagnostic movement assessment battery). Illusory misperceptions of object weight also did not appear to differ between groups. These findings suggest that issues with sensorimotor prediction are unlikely to affect the performance of simple real-world movements in those with DCD.

New evidence for the sensorimotor mismatch theory of weight perception and the size-weight illusion

The size-weight illusion is a phenomenon where a smaller object is perceived heavier than an equally weighted larger object. The sensorimotor mismatch theory proposed that this illusion occurs because of a mismatch between efferent motor commands and afferent sensory feedback received when lifting large and small objects (i.e., the application of too little and too much lifting force, respectively). This explanation has been undermined by studies demonstrating a separation between the perceived weight of objects and the lifting forces that are applied on them. However, this research suffers from inconsistencies in the choice of lifting force measures reported. Therefore, we examined the contribution of sensorimotor mismatch in the perception of weight in the size-weight illusion and in non-size-weight illusion stimuli and evaluated the use of a lifting force aggregate measure comprising the four most common lifting force measures used in previous research. In doing so, the sensorimotor mismatch theory was mostly supported. In a size-weight illusion experiment, the lifting forces correlated with weight perception and, contrary to some earlier research, did not adapt over time. In a non-size-weight illusion experiment, switches between lifting light and heavy objects resulted in perceiving the weight of these objects differently compared to no switch trials, which mirrored differences in the manner participants applied forces on the objects. Additionally, we reveal that our force aggregate measure can allow for a more sensitive and objective examination of the effects of lifting forces on objects.

The size-weight illusion in visual form agnosic patient DF

The size-weight illusion is a perceptual illusion where smaller objects are judged as heavier than equally weighted larger objects. A previous informal report suggests that visual form agnosic patient DF does not experience the size-weight illusion when vision is the only available cue to object size. We tested this experimentally, comparing the magnitudes of DF's visual, kinesthetic and visual-kinesthetic size-weight illusions to those of 28 similarly-aged controls. A modified t-test found that DF's visual size-weight illusion was significantly smaller than that of controls (z_cc = -1.7). A test of simple dissociation based on the Revised Standardized Difference Test found that the discrepancy between the magnitude of DF's visual and kinesthetic size-weight illusions was not significantly different from that of controls (z_dcc = -1.054), thereby failing to establish a dissociation between the visual and kinesthetic conditions. These results are consistent with previous suggestions that visual form agnosia, following ventral visual stream damage, is associated with an abnormally reduced size-weight illusion. The results, however, do not confirm that this reduction is specific to the use of visual size cues to predict object weight, rather than reflecting more general changes in the processing of object size cues or in the use of predictive strategies for lifting.

A meta-analysis of the size-weight and material-weight illusions

The current study comprises the first systematic meta-analysis of weight illusions. We obtained descriptive data from studies in which subjective heaviness estimates were made for pairs or groups of objects that had the same mass and different volumes (size-weight illusion; SWI) or different apparent material properties (material-weight illusion; MWI). Using these data, we calculated mean effect sizes to represent illusion strength. Other study details, including stimulus mass, volume, density, and degree of visual and somatosensory access to the stimuli were also recorded to quantify the contribution of these variables to effect sizes for the SWI. The results indicate that the SWI has a larger mean effect size than the MWI and that the former is consistent in strength when information about stimulus size is gained through somatosensory channels, regardless of visual access. The SWI is weaker when only the visual system provides size information. Effect sizes for the SWI were larger when there was a greater difference in volume across the stimuli. There was also a positive correlation between SWI strength and the difference in physical density across the different experimental stimuli, even after controlling for volume differences. Together, we argue that these findings provide support for theories of weight illusions that are based on conceptual expectancies as well as those that are based on bottom-up processing of physical density. We further propose that these processes, which have been considered dichotomously in the past, may not be mutually exclusive from each other and could both contribute to our perception of weight when we handle objects in everyday life.

The impact of using an upper-limb prosthesis on the perception of real and illusory weight differences

Little is known about how human perception is affected using an upper-limb prosthesis. To shed light on this topic, we investigated how using an upper-limb prosthesis affects individuals' experience of object weight. First, we examined how a group of upper-limb amputee prosthetic users experienced real mass differences and illusory weight differences in the context of the 'size-weight' illusion. Surprisingly, the upper-limb prosthetic users reported a markedly smaller illusion than controls, despite equivalent perceptions of a real mass difference. Next, we replicated this dissociation between real and illusory weight perception in a group of nonamputees who lifted the stimuli with an upper-limb myoelectric prosthetic simulator, again noting that the prosthetic users experienced illusory, but not real, weight differences as being weaker than controls. These findings not only validate the use of a prosthetic simulator as an effective tool for investigating perception and action but also highlight a surprising dissociation between the perception of real and illusory weight differences.