Egocentric and Allocentric Visual Cues Influence the Specification of Movement Distance and Direction

References

• Aglioti, S., DeSouza, J. F. X., & Goodale, M. (1995). Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Current Biology, 5, 679-685.
   Google Scholar
• Binsted, G., Brownell, K., Vorontsova, Z., Heath, M., & Saucier, D. (2007). Visuomotor system used target features unavailable to conscious awareness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 12669-12672.
   Google Scholar
• Binsted, G., & Heath, M. (2004). Can the motor system utilize a stored representation to control movement? Behavioral Brain Sciences, 27, 25-28.
   Google Scholar
• Brenner, E., & Smeets, J. B. (1995). Size illusion influences how we lift but not how we grasp an object. Experimental Brain Research, 111, 473-476.
   Google Scholar
• Bridgeman, B., Gemmer, A., Forsman, T., & Huemer, V. (2000). Processing spatial information in the sensorimotor branch of the visual system. Vision Research, 40, 3539-3552.
   Google Scholar
• Bridgeman, B., & Huemer, V. (1998). A spatially oriented decision does not induce consciousness in a motor task. Consciousness and Cognition, 7, 454-464.
   Google Scholar
• Bridgeman, B., Peery, S., & Anand, S. (1997). Interaction of cognitive and sensorimotor maps of visual space. Perception and Psychophysics, 3, 456-469.
   Google Scholar
• Coello, Y., Richaud, S., Magne, P., & Rossetti, Y. (2003). Vision for spatial perception and vision for action: A dissociation between the left-right and near-far dimensions. Neuropsychologia, 41, 622-633.
   Google Scholar
• Daprati, E., & Gentilucci, M. (1997). Grasping an illusion. Neuropsychologia, 35, 1577-1582.
   Google Scholar
• Dassonville, P., & Bala, J. K. (2004). Perception, action and Roelofs effect: A mere illusion of dissociation. PLOS Biology, 2, 1936-1945.
   Google Scholar
• Dassonville, P., Bridgeman, B., Bala, J. K., Thiem, P., & Sampanes, A. (2004). The induced Roelofs effect: Two visual systems or the shift of a single reference frame? Vision Research, 44, 603-611.
   Google Scholar
• de Grave, D. D. J., Brenner, E., & Smeets, J. B. J. (2004a). Are the original Roelofs effect and the induced Roelofs effect caused by the same shift in straight ahead? Vision Research, 42, 2279-2285.
   Google Scholar
• de Grave, D. D. J., Brenner, E., & Smeets, J. B. J. (2004b). Illusions as a tool to study the coding of pointing movements. Experimental Brain Research, 155, 56-62.
   Google Scholar
• Elliott, D., & Lee, T. D. (1995). The role of target information on manual-aiming bias. Psychological Research, 58, 2-9.
   Google Scholar
• Franz, V. H. (2003). Manual size estimation: A neuropsychological measure of perception? Experimental Brain Research, 151, 471-477.
   Google Scholar
• Franz, V. H., Fahle, M., Bülthoff, H. H., & Gegenfurtner, K. R. (2001). Effects of visual illusions on grasping. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 27, 1124-1144.
   Google Scholar
• Fukusima S. S., & Faubert, J. (2001). Perceived length in the central visual field: Evidence for visual field asymmetries. Vision Research, 41, 2119-2126.
   Google Scholar
• Gentilucci, M., Chieffi, S., Daprati, E., Saetti, M. C., & Toni, I. (1996). Visual illusion and action. Neurospsychologia, 24, 269-376.
   Google Scholar
• Glover, S. (2004). Separate visual representations in the planning and control of action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 3-24.
   Google Scholar
• Goodale, M. A., & Milner, A. D. (1992). Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends in Neuroscience, 15, 20-25.
   Google Scholar
• Goodale, M. A., Westwood, D. A., & Milner, A. D. (2004). Two distinct modes of control for object-directed action. Progress in Brain Research, 144, 131-144.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, J., Ghilardi, M. F., & Ghez, C. (1994). Accuracy of planar reaching movements. I. Independence of direction and extent variability. Experimental Brain Research, 99, 97-111.
   Google Scholar
• Haffenden, A. M., & Goodale, M. A. (1998). The effect of pictorial illusion on prehension and perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 122-136.
   Google Scholar
• Heath, M. (2005). Role of limb and target vision in the online control of memory-guided reaches. Motor Control, 9, 281-309.
   Google Scholar
• Heath, M., Neely, K., & Binsted, G. (2007). Allocentric visual cues influence online limb adjustments. Motor Control, 11, 54-70.
   Google Scholar
• Heath, M., Rival, C., & Binsted, G. (2004). Can the motor system resolve a premovement bias in grip aperture? Online analysis of grasping the Müller-Lyer illusion. Experimental Brain Research, 158, 378-384.
   Google Scholar
• Heath, M., Rival, C., & Neely, K. (2006). Visual feedback schedules influence visuomotor resistance to the Müller-Lyer figures. Experimental Brain Research, 168, 348-356.
   Google Scholar
• Heath, M., Rival, C., Neely, K., & Krigolson, O. (2006). Muller-Lyer figures influence the online reorganization of visually guided movements. Experimental Brain Research, 169, 473-481.
   Google Scholar
• Heath, M., & Westwood, D. A. (2003). Can a visual representation support the online control of memory-dependent aiming? Evidence from a variable spatial mapping paradigm. Motor Control, 7, 346-361.
   Google Scholar
• Heath, M., Westwood, D. A., & Binsted, G. (2004). The control of memory-guided reaching movements in peripersonal space. Motor Control, 8, 76-106.
   Google Scholar
• Held, R., & Gottlieb, N. (1958). Technique for studying adaptation to disarranged hand-eye coordination. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 8, 83-86.
   Google Scholar
• Krigolson, O., Clark, N., Heath, M., & Binsted, G. (2007). The proximity of visual landmarks impacts reaching performance. Spatial Vision, 20, 316-336.
   Google Scholar
• Krigolson, O., & Heath, M. (2004). Background visual cues and memory-guided reaches. Human Movement Science, 23, 861-867.
   Google Scholar
• Lemay, M., Bertram, C. P., & Stelmach, G. E. (2004). Pointing to an allocentric and egocentric remembered target. Motor Control, 8, 16-32.
   Google Scholar
• Mendoza, J. E., Elliott, D., Meegan, D. V., Lyons, J. L., & Welsh, T. N. (2006) The effect of the Müller-Lyer Illusion on the planning and control of manual aiming movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 413-422.
   Google Scholar
• Mendoza, J. E., Hansen, S., Glazebrook, C. M., Keetch, K. M., & Elliott, D. (2005). Visual illusions affect both movement planning and online control: A multiple cue position on bias and goal-directed action. Human Movement Science, 24, 760-773.
   Google Scholar
• Milner, D. A., & Goodale, M. A. (1995). The visual brain in action. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Obhi, S. S., & Goodale, M. A. (2005). The effects of landmarks on the performance of delayed and real-time pointing movements. Experimental Brain Research, 167, 335-344.
   Google Scholar
• Pedhazur, E. J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace.
   Google Scholar
• Radoeva, P. D., Cohen, J. D., Corballis, P. M., Lukovits, T. G., & Koleva, S. G. (2005). Hemispheric asymmetry in a dissociation between the visuomotor and visuoperceptual streams. Neuropsychologia, 43, 1763-1773.
   Google Scholar
• Westwood, D. A., & Goodale, M. A. (2003). Perceptual illusion and the real-time control of action. Spatial Vision, 16, 243-254.
   Google Scholar
• Westwood, D. A., Heath, M., & Roy, E. A. (2000). The effect of a pictorial illusion on closed-loop and open-loop prehension. Experimental Brain Research, 134, 456-463.
   Google Scholar
• Westwood, D. A., Heath, M., & Roy, E. A. (2003). No evidence for accurate visuomotor memory: Systematic and variable error in memory-guided reaching. Journal of Motor Behavior, 35, 127-133.
   Google Scholar
• Westwood, D. A., McEachern, T., & Roy, E. A. (2001). Delayed grasping of a Müller-Lyer figure. Experimental Brain Research, 141, 166-173.
   Google Scholar