Friction is preferred over grasp configuration in precision grip grasping
Friction is preferred over grasp configuration in precision grip grasping
How humans visually select where to grasp an object depends on many factors, including grasp stability and preferred grasp configuration. We examined how endpoints are selected when these two factors are brought into conflict: Do people favor stable grasps or do they prefer their natural grasp configurations? Participants reached to grasp one of three cuboids oriented so that its two corners were either aligned with, or rotated away from, each individual's natural grasp axis (NGA). All objects were made of brass (mass: 420g), but the surfaces of their sides were manipulated to alter friction: 1) all-brass, 2) two opposing sides covered with wood, and the other two remained of brass, or 3) two opposing sides covered with sandpaper, and the two remaining brass sides smeared with Vaseline. Grasps were evaluated as either clockwise (thumb to the left of finger in frontal plane) or counterclockwise of the NGA. Grasp endpoints depended on both object orientation and surface material. For the all-brass object, grasps were bimodally distributed in the NGA-aligned condition but predominantly clockwise in the NGA-unaligned condition. These data reflected participants' natural grasp configuration independently of surface material. When grasping objects with different surface materials, endpoint selection changed: Participants sacrificed their usual grasp configuration to choose the more stable object sides. A model in which surface material shifts participants' preferred grip angle proportionally to the perceived friction of the surfaces accounts for our results. Our findings demonstrate that a stable grasp is more important than a biomechanically comfortable grasp configuration. NEW & NOTEWORTHY When grasping an object, humans can place their fingers at several positions on its surface. The selection of these endpoints depends on many factors, with two of the most important being grasp stability and grasp configuration. We put these two factors in conflict and examine which is considered more important. Our results highlight that humans are not reluctant to adopt unusual grasp configurations to satisfy grasp stability.
Grasp angle, Grasping, Precision grip, Surface material
1330-1338
Klein, Lina K.
647f7604-4630-4cf1-9ae4-c0b84d28e97e
Maiello, Guido
c122b089-1bbc-4d3e-b178-b0a1b31a5295
Fleming, Roland W.
f9a60356-03e6-4931-a332-f3a7aa9f9915
Voudouris, Dimitris
721f6372-f833-4fa2-8a5b-258d4cd4ee8b
8 April 2021
Klein, Lina K.
647f7604-4630-4cf1-9ae4-c0b84d28e97e
Maiello, Guido
c122b089-1bbc-4d3e-b178-b0a1b31a5295
Fleming, Roland W.
f9a60356-03e6-4931-a332-f3a7aa9f9915
Voudouris, Dimitris
721f6372-f833-4fa2-8a5b-258d4cd4ee8b
Klein, Lina K., Maiello, Guido, Fleming, Roland W. and Voudouris, Dimitris
(2021)
Friction is preferred over grasp configuration in precision grip grasping.
Journal of Neurophysiology, 125 (4), .
(doi:10.1152/jn.00021.2021).
Abstract
How humans visually select where to grasp an object depends on many factors, including grasp stability and preferred grasp configuration. We examined how endpoints are selected when these two factors are brought into conflict: Do people favor stable grasps or do they prefer their natural grasp configurations? Participants reached to grasp one of three cuboids oriented so that its two corners were either aligned with, or rotated away from, each individual's natural grasp axis (NGA). All objects were made of brass (mass: 420g), but the surfaces of their sides were manipulated to alter friction: 1) all-brass, 2) two opposing sides covered with wood, and the other two remained of brass, or 3) two opposing sides covered with sandpaper, and the two remaining brass sides smeared with Vaseline. Grasps were evaluated as either clockwise (thumb to the left of finger in frontal plane) or counterclockwise of the NGA. Grasp endpoints depended on both object orientation and surface material. For the all-brass object, grasps were bimodally distributed in the NGA-aligned condition but predominantly clockwise in the NGA-unaligned condition. These data reflected participants' natural grasp configuration independently of surface material. When grasping objects with different surface materials, endpoint selection changed: Participants sacrificed their usual grasp configuration to choose the more stable object sides. A model in which surface material shifts participants' preferred grip angle proportionally to the perceived friction of the surfaces accounts for our results. Our findings demonstrate that a stable grasp is more important than a biomechanically comfortable grasp configuration. NEW & NOTEWORTHY When grasping an object, humans can place their fingers at several positions on its surface. The selection of these endpoints depends on many factors, with two of the most important being grasp stability and grasp configuration. We put these two factors in conflict and examine which is considered more important. Our results highlight that humans are not reluctant to adopt unusual grasp configurations to satisfy grasp stability.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 12 February 2021
Published date: 8 April 2021
Additional Information:
Funding Information:
This research was supported by the DFG (IRTG-1901: “The Brain in Action”; SFB-TRR-135: “Cardinal Mechanisms of Perception”, project number: 222641018) and an ERC Consolidator Award (ERC-2015-CoG-682859: “SHAPE”). G. Maiello was supported by a Marie-Skłodowska-Curie Actions Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2017: “VisualGrasping” Project ID: 793660).
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2021 the American Physiological Society
Keywords:
Grasp angle, Grasping, Precision grip, Surface material
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 484859
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/484859
ISSN: 0022-3077
PURE UUID: 0e02e5fa-342f-45c6-b30f-8ace70effec1
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 23 Nov 2023 17:54
Last modified: 06 Jun 2024 02:17
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Lina K. Klein
Author:
Guido Maiello
Author:
Roland W. Fleming
Author:
Dimitris Voudouris
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics