HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 93/4/2021    most recent 00599.2004v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Quaney, B. M. Articles by Cole, K. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Quaney, B. M. Articles by Cole, K. J.

Can Internal Models of Objects be Utilized for Different Prehension Tasks?

¹Center on Aging, Department of Molecular and Integrative Physiology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas; and ²Department of Exercise Science, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa

Submitted 11 June 2004; accepted in final form 5 December 2004

We examined if object information obtained during one prehension task is used to produce fingertip forces for handling the same object in a different prehension task. Our observations address the task specificity of the internal models presumed to issue commands for grasping and transporting objects. Two groups participated in a 2-day experiment in which they lifted a novel object (230 g; 1.2 g/cm³). On Day One, the high force group (HFG) lifted the object by applying 10 N of grip force prior to applying vertical lift force. This disrupted the usual coordination of grip and lift forces and represented a higher grip force than necessary. The self-selected force group (SSFG) lifted the object on Day One with no instructions regarding their grip or lift forces. They first generated grip forces of 5.8 N, which decreased to 2.6 N by the 10th lift. Four hours later, they lifted the same object in the manner of the HFG. On Day Two, both groups lifted the same object "naturally and comfortably" with the opposite hand. The SSFG began Day Two using a grip force of 2.5 N, consistent with the acquisition of an accurate object representation during Day One. The HFG began Day Two using accurately scaled lift forces, but produced grip forces that virtually replicated those of the SSFG on Day One. We concur with recent suggestions that separate, independently adapted internal models produce grip and lift commands. The object representation that scaled lift force was not available to scale grip force. Furthermore, the concept of a general-purpose object representation that is available across prehension tasks was not supported.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Hermsdorfer, Z. Elias, J. D. Cole, B. M. Quaney, and D. A. Nowak Preserved and Impaired Aspects of Feed-Forward Grip Force Control After Chronic Somatosensory Deafferentation Neurorehabil Neural Repair, July 1, 2008; 22(4): 374 - 384. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Ansuini, M. Santello, S. Massaccesi, and U. Castiello Effects of End-Goal on Hand Shaping J Neurophysiol, April 1, 2006; 95(4): 2456 - 2465. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. M. Quaney, S. Perera, R. Maletsky, C. W. Luchies, and R. J. Nudo Impaired Grip Force Modulation in the Ipsilesional Hand after Unilateral Middle Cerebral Artery Stroke Neurorehabil Neural Repair, December 1, 2005; 19(4): 338 - 349. [Abstract] [PDF]