Biomedical subjects

Thomas Eggert

Publications and source records attributed to Thomas Eggert.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2004

Impaired temporal prediction and eye-hand coordination in patients with cerebellar lesions.

This study investigated the effect of cerebellar lesions on temporal prediction and coordination in eye and hand movements. Nine patients with cerebellar lesions were compared to controls while they made saccades with and without simultaneous pointing movements towards a target that was either temporally predictable or non-predictable. The direction and amplitude of the target step was always predictable. Patients made much more early and late saccades than controls, but an equal amount of visually triggered saccades. This suggests that inappropriate saccades could be suppressed during the preparation of a goal-directed saccade. Hand movement frequency did not differ between both groups. Thus, cerebellar lesions can induce inappropriate saccades more easily than inappropriate hand movements. Controls, but not patients, generated visually triggered saccades of shorter latencies when the target was temporally predictable. Thus, the patients could not use information about target timing to synchronise visually triggered saccades with the target. They could, however, use this information to improve the suppression of inappropriate saccades. Regarding coordination, patients showed impairments in synchronising saccades with hand movements. Nevertheless, hand movements led to an enhancement of anticipatory saccades in patients as in controls. Moreover, hand movements and temporal predictability affected saccadic accuracy in both groups similarly. These results suggest that cerebellar lesions do not generally prevent access to temporal information on the rhythm of a target sequence or the timing of a planned hand movement. More specifically, the cerebellum seems to be crucial for synchronizing saccades with such learned or planned temporal events.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Predictive strategies in interception tasks: differences between eye and hand movements.

To investigate how the sensorimotor systems of eye and hand use position, velocity, and timing information of moving targets, we conducted a series of three experiments. Subjects performed combined eye-hand catch-up movements toward visual targets that moved with step-ramp-like velocity profiles. Visual feedback of the hand was prevented by blanking the target at the onset of the hand movement. A multiple regression was used to determine the effects of position, velocity, and timing accessed before each movement on the movement amplitudes of eye and hand. The following results were obtained: 1. The predictive strategy of eye movements could be modeled by a linear regression on the basis of the position error and the target velocity. This was not the case for hand movements, for which there was a significant partial correlation between the movement amplitude and the product of target velocity and movement duration. This correlation was not observed for eye movements suggesting that the predictive strategy of hand movements takes movement duration into account, in contrast to the strategy used in eye movements. 2. To determine whether the movement amplitudes of eye and hand depend on a categorical classification between a discrete number of movement types, we compared an experiment in which target position and velocity were distributed continuously with an experiment using only four different combinations of target position and velocity. No systematic differences between these experiments were observed. This shows that the system output is a function of continuous, interval-scaled variables rather than a function of discrete categorical variables. 3. We also analyzed the component of the movement amplitudes not explained by the regression, i.e., the residual error. The residual errors between subsequent trials were correlated more strongly for eye than for hand movements, suggesting that short-term temporal fluctuations of the predictive strategy were stronger for the eye than for the hand.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Saccades to stationary and moving targets differ in the monkey.

Saccade characteristics in response to moving and stationary targets were studied in three monkeys (Macaca mulatta) that had been trained to look at a target, which after an initial jump either remained in place or moved forward or backward with constant velocity (10 degrees /s). Eye movements were recorded using a search coil. The contribution of smooth pursuit to the saccade amplitude was small (<0.25 degrees ). Saccades having the same amplitude (5.67-6.83 degrees for different monkeys) to forward and backward moving targets were compared. Peak velocity was higher (37-42 degrees /s on average for different monkeys) and saccade duration was shorter (8-10 ms on average) for backward saccades than for forward saccades These differences were highly significant (t-test: P<0.001). Thus, forward and backward saccades are not on the same main sequence. This suggests that saccade dynamics are affected not only by the retinal position error but also by target motion. Further analysis revealed that saccade peak velocity mainly depends on the retinal position error, but saccade amplitude also depends on a stimulus-related velocity factor, which affects the saccade mainly during deceleration. This velocity factor could be retinal slip or target velocity, which was the same under our conditions. Our results experimentally support recent models that propose that the saccade acceleration in response to moving targets might be controlled by the superior colliculus, whereas the deceleration changes are fine-tuned by the cerebellum. This prediction must still be tested on a neuronal level.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2003

Haptic texture affects the kinematics of pointing movements, but not of eye movements.

Discrepant findings on the degree of eye-hand coupling suggest its dependence on the task. One task characteristic modulating this coupling may be the relevance of certain target attributes for each motor system. We tested this assumption by comparing eye and hand movements towards targets of different haptic texture, a target attribute which is behaviourally relevant only to the hand, not the eye. Pointing to a slippery target (fur) resulted in longer hand movement time than to a rougher target (sandpaper). This effect was due to an increased ratio of time spent in deceleration. In contrast, eye movement time was invariant across different haptic target textures. Thus, information about target texture is used differently by eye and hand.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Predictive pointing movements and saccades toward a moving target.

The authors investigated whether and, if so, how velocity information is used to control predictive manual pointing movements and saccades. Participants (N = 6) intercepted an occluded moving target as if it were still visible. They kept their eyes fixated while the target moved. The target traveled over a fixed distance and changed its velocity on the way. The presentation time of the final velocity was varied. Both the eye and the hand overshot the slow target and undershot the fast target, particularly when the duration of the final velocity was short. Thus, responses were biased in the direction of the target's initial velocity. The error seemed to arise because participants did not take their latency into account when aiming at the target. Instead, they strategically aimed farther ahead when the target was fast. Amplitude was also more related to the position of velocity change than to final velocity duration. Both findings suggest that target velocity is not extrapolated but that individuals add an increment to the position of velocity change.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Modeling visuospatial perception in neglect patients.

The spatial distortion hypothesis is one of several theories that explain certain aspects of neglect in patients with right parietal lesions. To determine whether a distorted representation of space can account for the performance of neglect patients in different visuospatial tasks, we asked 26 neglect patients to: (1) bisect horizontal lines and (2) to compare the width of two horizontally aligned bars. A simple mathematical model compatible with the idea of a stationary distortion of represented space in egocentric coordinates explained the results of the line-bisection task. A second model that had basically the same structure and was compatible with the idea of a distorted egocentric representation based on a dynamic remapping of space approximated the size-comparison data. These results support the view that abnormalities observed in the line-bisection and size-comparison tasks are due to a distorted internal representation of the external world. Certain findings suggest that this distortion could be based on a dynamic mapping of space determined by the distribution of visuospatial attention.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Implications of distracter effects for the organization of eye movements, hand movements, and perception.

The end positions of eye and hand movements were both drawn towards a distracter that was presented nearby the target. They thus showed a so-called global effect. In contrast, perception was not influenced by the presence of a distracter. These results are discussed with regard to the question whether eye, hand, and perception are based on shared or separate target representations and readout triggers. We conclude that separate representations and readout triggers for eye and hand are the most likely case.

Eye Movements↗

PubMed2002

Global effect of a nearby distractor on targeting eye and hand movements.

Eye-hand coordination was investigated with the global effect paradigm. In this paradigm, saccades typically land in between the target and a nearby presented distractor, the configuration's center of gravity. This so-called global effect, or spatial averaging, is attributed to incomplete target selection. Four experiments demonstrated a similar effect for hand movements; thus, eye and hand are coupled during target selection. However, under some conditions the global effect was different for eye and hand, suggesting that their coupling is not achieved through a shared target representation. Instead, eye and hand seem to use 2 separate target representations that exchange information. The convergent amplitudes of eye and hand with simultaneous execution support this interpretation. Latencies showed a similar converging pattern.

Adult↗