Maximum Grip Aperture Research Articles

Sensorimotor adaptation impedes perturbation detection in grasping.

Humans achieve skilled actions by continuously correcting for motor errors or perceptual misjudgments, a process called sensorimotor adaptation. This can occur with the actor both detecting (explicitly) and not detecting the error (implicitly). We investigated how the magnitude of a perturbation and the corresponding error signal each contribute to the detection of a size perturbation during interaction with real-world objects. Participants grasped cuboids of different lengths in a mirror-setup allowing us to present different sizes for seen and felt cuboids, respectively. Visuo-haptic size mismatches (perturbations) were introduced either abruptly or followed a sinusoidal schedule. These schedules dissociated the error signal from the visuo-haptic mismatch: Participants could fully adapt their grip and reduce the error when a perturbation was introduced abruptly and then stayed the same, but not with a constantly changing sinusoidal perturbation. We compared participants' performance in a two-alternative forced choice (2AFC) task where participants judged these mismatches, and modelled error-correction in grasping movements by looking at changes in maximum grip apertures, measured using motion tracking. We found similar mismatch-detection performance with sinusoidal perturbation schedules and the first trial after an abrupt change, but decreasing performance over further trials for the latter. This is consistent with the idea that reduced error signals following adaptation make it harder to detect perturbations. Error-correction parameters indicated stronger error-correction in abruptly introduced perturbations. However, we saw no correlation between error-correction and overall mismatch-detection performance. This emphasizes the distinct contributions of the perturbation magnitude and the error signal in helping participants detect sensory perturbations.

Grasping tiny objects.

In grasping studies, maximum grip aperture (MGA) is commonly used as an indicator of the object size representation within the visuomotor system. However, a number of additional factors, such as movement safety, comfort, and efficiency, might affect the scaling of MGA with object size and potentially mask perceptual effects on actions. While unimanual grasping has been investigated for a wide range of object sizes, so far very small objects (<5mm) have not been included. Investigating grasping of these tiny objects is particularly interesting because it allows us to evaluate the three most prominent explanatory accounts of grasping (the perception-action model, the digits-in-space hypothesis, and the biomechanical account) by comparing the predictions that they make for these small objects. In the first experiment, participants ( ) grasped and manually estimated the height of square cuboids with heights from 0.5 to 5mm. In the second experiment, a different sample of participants ( ) performed the same tasks with square cuboids with heights from 5 to 20mm. We determined MGAs, manual estimation apertures (MEA), and the corresponding just-noticeable differences (JND). In both experiments, MEAs scaled with object height and adhered to Weber's law. MGAs for grasping scaled with object height in the second experiment but not consistently in the first experiment. JNDs for grasping never scaled with object height. We argue that the digits-in-space hypothesis provides the most plausible account of the data. Furthermore, the findings highlight that the reliability of MGA as an indicator of object size is strongly task-dependent.

The effect of the Uznadze illusion is temporally dynamic in closed-loop but temporally constant in open-loop grasping.

Although it is known that the availability of visual feedback modulates grasping kinematics, it is unclear whether this extends to both the early and late stages of the movement. We tackled this issue by exposing participants to the Uznadze illusion (a medium stimulus appears larger or smaller after exposure to smaller or larger inducers). After seeing smaller or larger discs, participants grasped a medium disc with (closed-loop [CL]) or without (open-loop [OL]) visual feedback. Our main aim was to assess whether the time course of the illusion from the movement onset up to the grasp differed between OL and CL. Moreover, we compared OL and CL illusory effects on maximum grip aperture (MGA) and tested whether preparation time, movement time, and time to MGA predicted illusion magnitude. Results revealed that CL illusory effects decreased over movement time, whereas OL ones remained constant. At the time of MGA, OL, and CL effects were, however, of similar size. Although OL grasps were longer to prepare and showed earlier and larger MGAs, such differences had little impact on modulating the illusion. These results suggest that the early stage of grasping is sensitive to the Uznadze illusion both under CL and OL conditions, whereas the late phase is sensitive to it only under OL conditions. We discuss these findings within the framework of theoretical models on the functional properties of the dorsal stream for visually guided actions.

Visual processing of actions directed towards three-dimensional objects in immersive virtual reality may involve holistic processing of object shape

Immersive virtual reality using a head-mounted display (HMD-VR) is increasing in use for motor learning and motor skill training. However, it remains unclear how visual information for action is processed in an HMD-VR environment. In the real world, actions towards three-dimensional (3D) objects are processed analytically and are immune to perceptual effects, such as processing object dimensions irrelevant to performing the action (i.e., holistic processing). However, actions towards two-dimensional (2D) objects are processed holistically and are susceptible to perceptual effects. In HMD-VR, distances are often underestimated, and the environment can appear flatter compared to the real world. Thus, actions towards virtual 3D objects in HMD-VR may be processed more like 2D objects and involve holistic processing, which is susceptible to perceptual effects. In an initial study, we used a Garner interference task to examine whether vision-for-action in HMD-VR is processed holistically and hypothesized that vision-for-action towards virtual 3D objects in HMD-VR would result in a Garner interference effect, suggesting holistic processing. We found Garner interference effects for reaction times to reach maximum grip aperture and to complete movement. These results show that visual processing of actions towards virtual 3D objects in HMD-VR may involve holistic processing of object shape. These findings demonstrate that visual information for action in HMD-VR is processed differently compared to real 3D objects and is susceptible to perceptual effects, which could affect motor skill training in HMD-VR.

Influence of the Somatic Rubber Hand Illusion on Maximum Grip Aperture

The classic rubber hand illusion (RHI), based on visual, proprioceptive, and tactile feedback, can affect actions. However, it is not known whether these effects still occur if the paradigm is administered without visual feedback. In this study, we used the somatic RHI to test in thirty-two healthy individuals whether the incorporation of the rubber hand based on proprioceptive and tactile information only is sufficient to generate changes in actions. We measured maximum grip aperture (GA) changes towards a target and associated brain activations within the dorsal stream before and after the somatic RHI. Behavioural and neuroimaging data do not support an effect on maximum GA when the RHI is based on proprioceptive and tactile information only.

Are reaching and grasping effector-independent? Similarities and differences in reaching and grasping kinematics between the hand and foot

While reaching and grasping are highly prevalent manual actions, neuroimaging studies provide evidence that their neural representations may be shared between different body parts, i.e., effectors. If these actions are guided by effector-independent mechanisms, similar kinematics should be observed when the action is performed by the hand or by a cortically remote and less experienced effector, such as the foot. We tested this hypothesis with two characteristic components of action: the initial ballistic stage of reaching, and the preshaping of the digits during grasping based on object size. We examined if these kinematic features reflect effector-independent mechanisms by asking participants to reach toward and to grasp objects of different widths with their hand and foot. First, during both reaching and grasping, the velocity profile up to peak velocity matched between the hand and the foot, indicating a shared ballistic acceleration phase. Second, maximum grip aperture and time of maximum grip aperture of grasping increased with object size for both effectors, indicating encoding of object size during transport. Differences between the hand and foot were found in the deceleration phase and time of maximum grip aperture, likely due to biomechanical differences and the participants’ inexperience with foot actions. These findings provide evidence for effector-independent visuomotor mechanisms of reaching and grasping that generalize across body parts.

Dual processes underlie the effect of the Ebbinghaüs illusion on control of grasping.

Previous studies have shown that control of grasping is affected by the Ebbinghaüs illusion. However, there is debate about whether effects on grasping are solely due to the illusion or involve other processes. The aim of this study was to distinguish the influences of the size illusion and obstacle avoidance on control of grip aperture. We compared size perception and grip aperture during grasping for targets in Ebbinghaüs contexts that varied in the size, distance and density of flankers. The size illusion is affected by all of these flanker parameters, while effects due to obstacle avoidance would depend primarily on flanker-target distance. We found that flanker size had consistent effects on perceptual estimation and grip control during grasping: larger flankers caused the target to appear smaller, and the maximum grip aperture (MGA) during grasping was reduced. However, the effects of flanker-target distance were more complicated. Increasing flanker-target distance generally caused the target to appear smaller but this effect became weaker with sparse flankers. For grip control, the flanker-target distance effect had opposite directions in two flanker density conditions: Increasing flanker-target distance caused MGA to decrease with dense flankers and to increase with sparse flankers. These findings can be explained by a combination of influences from size illusion and obstacle avoidance on grasping. Our results do not support that visuomotor control is immune to visual illusions, such as the Ebbinghaüs illusion. Apparent discrepancies between perception and visuomotor control with visual illusions could be explained by additional influence of obstacle avoidance mechanisms. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Size Perception Bias and Reach-to-Grasp Kinematics: An Exploratory Study on the Virtual Hand With a Consumer Immersive Virtual-Reality Device

While studies have increasingly used virtual hands and objects in virtual environments to investigate various processes of psychological phenomena, conflicting findings have been reported even at the most basic level of perception and action. To reconcile this situation, the present study aimed 1) to assess biases in size perception of a virtual hand using a strict psychophysical method and 2) to provide firm and conclusive evidence of the kinematic characteristics of reach-to-grasp movements with various virtual effectors (whole hand or fingertips only, with or without tactile feedback of a target object). Experiments were conducted using a consumer immersive virtual reality device. In a size judgment task, participants judged whether a presented virtual hand or an everyday object was larger than the remembered size. The results showed the same amplitude of underestimation (approximately 5%) for the virtual hand and the object, and no influence of object location, visuo-proprioceptive congruency, or short-term experience of controlling the virtual hand. Furthermore, there was a moderate positive correlation between actual hand size and perception bias. Analyses of reach-to-grasp movements revealed longer movement times and larger maximum grip aperture (MGA) for a virtual, as opposed to a physical, environment, but the MGA did not change when grasping was performed without tactile feedback. The MGA appeared earlier in the time course of grasping movements in all virtual reality conditions, regardless of the type of virtual effector. These findings confirm and corroborate previous evidence and may contribute to the field of virtual hand interfaces for interactions with virtual worlds.

Grasping of Real-World Objects Is Not Biased by Ensemble Perception.

The visual system is known to extract summary representations of visually similar objects which bias the perception of individual objects toward the ensemble average. Although vision plays a large role in guiding action, less is known about whether ensemble representation is informative for action. Motor behavior is tuned to the veridical dimensions of objects and generally considered resistant to perceptual biases. However, when the relevant grasp dimension is not available or is unconstrained, ensemble perception may be informative to behavior by providing gist information about surrounding objects. In the present study, we examined if summary representations of a surrounding ensemble display influenced grip aperture and orientation when participants reached-to-grasp a central circular target which had an explicit size but importantly no explicit orientation that the visuomotor system could selectively attend to. Maximum grip aperture and grip orientation were not biased by ensemble statistics during grasping, although participants were able to perceive and provide manual estimations of the average size and orientation of the ensemble display. Support vector machine classification of ensemble statistics achieved above-chance classification accuracy when trained on kinematic and electromyography data of the perceptual but not grasping conditions, supporting our univariate findings. These results suggest that even along unconstrained grasping dimensions, visually-guided behaviors toward real-world objects are not biased by ensemble processing.

Role of the fronto-parietal cortex in prospective action judgments

Prospective judgments about one’s capability to perform an action are assumed to involve mental simulation of the action. Previous studies of motor imagery suggest this simulation is supported by a large fronto-parietal network including the motor system. Experiment 1 used fMRI to assess the contribution of this fronto-parietal network to judgments about one’s capacity to grasp objects of different sizes between index and thumb. The neural network underlying prospective graspability judgments overlapped the fronto-parietal network involved in explicit motor imagery of grasping. However, shared areas were located in the right hemisphere, outside the motor cortex, and were also activated during perceptual length judgments, suggesting a contribution to object size estimate rather than motor simulation. Experiment 2 used TMS over the motor cortex to probe transient excitability changes undetected with fMRI. Results show that graspability judgments elicited a selective increase of excitability in the thumb and index muscles, which was maximal before the object display and intermediate during the judgment. Together, these findings suggest that prospective action judgments do not rely on the motor system to simulate the action per se but to refresh the memory of one’s maximal grip aperture and facilitate its comparison with object size in right fronto-parietal areas.

Grasping performance depends upon the richness of hand feedback.

Although visual feedback of the hand allows fast and accurate grasping actions, little is known about whether the nature of feedback of the hand affects performance. We investigated kinematics during precision grasping (with the index finger and thumb) when participants received different levels of hand feedback, with or without visual feedback of the target. Specifically, we compared performance when participants saw (1) no hand feedback; (2) only the two critical points on the index finger and thumb tips; (3) 21 points on all digit tips and hand joints; (4) 21 points connected by a "skeleton", or (5) full feedback of the hand wearing a glove. When less hand feedback was available, participants took longer to execute the movement because they allowed more time to slow the reach and close the hand. When target feedback was unavailable, participants took longer to plan the movement and reached with higher velocity. We were particularly interested in investigating maximum grip aperture (MGA), which can reflect the margin of error that participants allow to compensate for uncertainty. A trend suggested that MGA was smallest when ample feedback was available (skeleton and full hand feedback, regardless of target feedback) and when only essential information about hand and target was provided (2-point hand feedback + target feedback) but increased when non-essential points were included (21-point feedback). These results suggest that visual feedback of the hand affects grasping performance and that, while more feedback is usually beneficial, this is not necessarily always the case.

Test-retest repeatability reveals a temporal kinematic signature for an upper limb precision grasping task in adults.

Hand-eye coordination skills, such as reaching and grasping, are fundamentally important for the performance of most daily activities. Upper limb kinematics recorded by motion tracking systems provide detailed insight into the central nervous system control of movement planning and execution. For example, kinematic metrics can reveal deficits in control, and compensatory neuromotor strategies in individuals with neuropathologies. However, the clinical utility of kinematic metrics is currently limited because their psychometric properties, such as test-retest repeatability, have not been well characterized. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the degree of repeatability of spatiotemporal kinematic metrics and determine which, if any, measures form a kinematic signature for a precision grasping task. Healthy adults (n=40) were tested on two occasions separated by 5-10days on a bead threading task consisting of reaching and precision grasping. Results showed good test-retest repeatability for reach peak velocity, reach and grasp durations, whereas poor to moderate reliability was observed for measures of spatial precision and maximum grip aperture. In addition, analysis showed that reliable estimates of kinematic metrics can be obtained using 10 trials. Overall, our results indicate that reach peak velocity and temporal metrics form a stable characteristic, or a kinematic signature, of individual performance on a standardized bead threading task. These findings suggest potential utility in applying kinematic metrics for clinical assessment of upper limb reaching tasks.

The Correlation Between Reach and Grasp Kinematic Measures and Clinical Measures of Manual Dexterity in Patients With Parkinson Disease

Background and Objectives: To investigate the correlation between reach and grasp kinematic measures and clinical measures of gross and fine manual dexterity in patients with idiopathic Parkinson Disease (PD). Methods: Sixty patients (44 men, 16 women) with idiopathic PD (Mean±SD of age: 59.85±11.89 years) were recruited in this non-experimental cross-sectional study using a non-probability sampling method. Their gross and fine manual dexterity were assessed using the Box and Block Test (BBT) and Nine Hole Peg Test (NHPT), respectively. Also, reach and grasp kinematic measures (including normalized movement time, peak velocity, Maximum Grip Aperture [MGA], and percentage of movement time in which MGA occurred [PMGA]) were measured in the more affected hand. Results: The results showed a significant and moderate correlation between reach kinematic measures (i.e. normalized movement time and peak velocity) and both gross and fine manual dexterity assessed by BBT (P=0.000) and NHPT (P=0.000), respectively. However, there was not a significant correlation between grasp kinematic measures (i.e. MGA and PMGA) and gross manual dexterity measured by BBT (P&gt;0.05) as well as fine manual dexterity assessed by NHPT (P&gt;0.05). Conclusion: This study showed no to moderate correlation between reach and grasp kinematic measures and clinical measures of gross and fine manual dexterity in patients with PD, supporting the significance of multi-level evaluation using both clinical and kinematic measures in the evaluation of upper limb function in patients with PD.

The influence of the Sander parallelogram illusion and early, middle and late vision on goal-directed reaching and grasping

Vision is one of the most robust sensory inputs used for the execution of goal-directed actions. Despite a history of extensive visuomotor research, how individuals process visual context for the execution of movements continues to be debated. This experiment examines how early, middle and late visuomotor control is impacted by illusory characteristics in a reaching and grasping task. Participants either manually estimated or reached out and picked up a three-dimensional target bar resting on a two-dimensional picture of the Sander parallelogram illusion. Participants performed their grasps within a predefined time movement window based on their own average grasp time, allowing for the manipulation of visual feedback. On some trials, vision was only available before the response cue (an auditory tone), while on others vision was occluded until the response cue, becoming available for either the full, early, middle or late portions of the movement. While results showed that the effect of the illusion was stronger on manual estimations than on grasping, maximum grip apertures in the occluded vision and early vision grasping conditions were also consistent to a lesser extent with the illusion. The late vision condition showed longer movement time, wrist deceleration period, time to maximum grip aperture and lower maximum velocity. These findings indicate that visual context affects visuomotor control distinctly depending on when vision is available, and supports the notion that human vision is comprised of two functionally and anatomically distinct systems.

The left cerebral hemisphere may be dominant for the control of bimanual symmetric reach-to-grasp movements.

Previous research has established that the left cerebral hemisphere is dominant for the control of continuous bimanual movements. The lateralisation of motor control for discrete bimanual movements, in contrast, is underexplored. The purpose of the current study was to investigate which (if either) hemisphere is dominant for discrete bimanual movements. Twenty-one participants made bimanual reach-to-grasp movements towards pieces of candy. Participants grasped the candy to either place it in their mouths (grasp-to-eat) or in a receptacle near their mouths (grasp-to-place). Research has shown smaller maximum grip apertures (MGAs) for unimanual grasp-to-eat movements than unimanual grasp-to-place movements when controlled by the left hemisphere. In Experiment 1, participants made bimanual symmetric movements where both hands made grasp-to-eat or grasp-to-place movements. We hypothesised that a left hemisphere dominance for bimanual movements would cause smaller MGAs in both hands during bimanual grasp-to-eat movements compared to those in bimanual grasp-to-place movements. The results revealed that MGAs were indeed smaller for bimanual grasp-to-eat movements than grasp-to-place movements. This supports that the left hemisphere may be dominant for the control of bimanual symmetric movements, which agrees with studies on continuous bimanual movements. In Experiment 2, participants made bimanual asymmetric movements where one hand made a grasp-to-eat movement while the other hand made a grasp-to-place movement. The results failed to support the potential predictions of left hemisphere dominance, right hemisphere dominance, or contralateral control.

Social Motor Priming: when offline interference facilitates motor execution.

Many daily activities involve synchronizing with other people’s actions. Previous literature has revealed that a slowdown of performance occurs whenever the action to be carried out is different to the one observed (i.e., visuomotor interference). However, action execution can be facilitated by observing a different action if it calls for an interactive gesture (i.e., social motor priming). The aim of this study is to investigate the costs and benefits of spontaneously processing a social response and then executing the same or a different action. Participants performed two different types of grips, which could be either congruent or not with the socially appropriate response and with the observed action. In particular, participants performed a precision grip (PG; thumb-index fingers opposition) or a whole-hand grasp (WHG; fingers-palm opposition) after observing videos showing an actor performing a PG and addressing them (interactive condition) or not (non-interactive condition). Crucially, in the interactive condition, the most appropriate response was a WHG, but in 50 percent of trials participants were asked to perform a PG. This procedure allowed us to measure both the facilitator effect of performing an action appropriate to the social context (WHG)—but different with respect to the observed one (PG)—and the cost of inhibiting it. These effects were measured by means of 3-D kinematical analysis of movement. Results show that, in terms of reaction time and movement time, the interactive request facilitated (i.e., speeded) the socially appropriate action (WHG), whereas interfered with (i.e., delayed) a different action (PG), although observed actions were always PGs. This interference also manifested with an increase of maximum grip aperture, which seemingly reflects the concurrent representation of the socially appropriate response. Overall, these findings extend previous research by revealing that physically incongruent action representations can be integrated into a single action plan even during an offline task and without any training.

Sensory feedback reduces scalar variability effects in perception and action tasks

According to Weber’s law, the variability in a perceptual response scales with physical stimulus magnitude. Such scalar variability effects are widely observed in visual perception, but recent work shows that the kinematics of visually guided actions instead show equivalent variability across stimulus magnitudes. To account for this surprising violation of a supposedly lawful phenomenon, resistance to Weber’s law has been touted as a feature of specialized vision-for-action processing, separate from perceptual processing. In this study, we investigated the alternative hypothesis that limited scalar variability is achieved by movement recalibration based on sensory feedback. In Experiment 1, participants performed a pantomime grasping block without any feedback and a feedback grasping block with visual and haptic feedback. These were alternated with three manual size estimation (MSE) blocks, counterbalancing for task order. Scalar variability affected the maximum grip apertures of pantomime grasps, but not normal grasps. More interestingly, a reduction in Weber’s fraction was observed for MSEs following normal grasping, but not following pantomime grasping. When pantomime and normal grasping were intermixed (but with explicit cues to trial type), scalar variability was absent for both. Next, we investigated whether haptic feedback from grasping plays an irreplaceable role in reducing scalar variability, or if visual feedback in a perceptual task will also suffice. Experiment 2 consisted of three MSE blocks, with no feedback in the first and last blocks, but with visual feedback of the grip aperture relative to the target object in the middle block (two lines around the target displayed immediately upon entering the estimate). Visual feedback significantly enhanced accuracy and precision in the second block while also reducing scalar variability; these effects carried over into the third block. Clearly, sensory feedback plays a central role in the reduction of scalar variability, regardless of any functional distinction between perception and action tasks.

Grasping Discriminates between Object Sizes Less Not More Accurately than the Perceptual System.

Ganel, Freud, Chajut, and Algom (2012) demonstrated that maximum grip apertures (MGAs) differ significantly when grasping perceptually identical objects. From this finding they concluded that the visual size information used by the motor system is more accurate than the visual size information available to the perceptual system. A direct comparison between the accuracy in the perception and the action system is, however, problematic, given that accuracy in the perceptual task is measured using a dichotomous variable, while accuracy in the visuomotor task is determined using a continuous variable. We addressed this problem by dichotomizing the visuomotor measures. Using this approach, our results show that size discrimination in grasping is in fact inferior to perceptual discrimination therefore contradicting the original suggestion put forward by Ganel and colleagues.

On the Neurocircuitry of Grasping: The influence of action intent on kinematic asymmetries in reach-to-grasp actions.

Evidence from electrophysiology suggests that nonhuman primates produce reach-to-grasp movements based on their functional end goal rather than on the biomechanical requirements of the movement. However, the invasiveness of direct-electrical stimulation and single-neuron recording largely precludes analogous investigations in humans. In this review, we present behavioural evidence in the form of kinematic analyses suggesting that the cortical circuits responsible for reach-to-grasp actions in humans are organized in a similar fashion. Grasp-to-eat movements are produced with significantly smaller and more precise maximum grip apertures (MGAs) than are grasp-to-place movements directed toward the same objects, despite near identical mechanical requirements of the two subsequent (i.e., grasp-to-eat and grasp-to-place) movements. Furthermore, the fact that this distinction is limited to right-handed movements suggests that the system governing reach-to-grasp movements is asymmetric. We contend that this asymmetry may be responsible, at least in part, for the preponderance of right-hand dominance among the global population.

Thirst for Intention? Grasping a Glass Is a Thirst-Controlled Action.

Every day and every hour, we feel we perform numerous voluntary actions, i.e., actions under the control of our will. Individual’s ability to initiate goal-directed movement is classically described as a hierarchical motor organization, from an intentional module, mostly considered as a black box, to muscular activity supporting action execution. The general focus is usually set on the triggering of action by intention, which is assumed to be the only entry to the action cascade, rather than on the preceding formation of intentions. If intentions play a key role in the specification of movement kinematic parameters, it remains largely unknown whether unconscious cognitive processes may also affect action preparation and unfolding. Recently, a seemingly irrelevant variable, thirst, was shown to modulate a simple arbitrary action such as key-pressing. Thirsty individuals were shown to produce stronger motor inhibition in no-go trials when a glass of water was present. In the present experiment, we intended to explore whether motor inhibition operates not only upstream from the action cascade but may also affect the unfolding of reaching movements, i.e., at a lower-level control. Thirsty vs. non-thirsty control subjects were asked to reach and grasp green (go trial) or red glasses (no-go trial) filled with either water or transparent gel wax with a central candlewick. Thirsty subjects were faster to initiate actions toward the water glasses. They also exhibited an earlier maximal grip aperture and a global reduction of movement time which was mostly explained by a shortening of deceleration time. The deceleration phase was correlated with individual’s thirst rating. In addition, no-go trial toward a glass of water tended to inhibit the next movement toward a glass filled with gel wax. Thus, our results show that an unintentional influence of an internal state can reorganize voluntary action structure not only at the decision-making level but also at the level of motor control. Although subjects explicitly paid more attention and were more cautious to glasses filled with water, they reported no explicit sensation of an increased urge to grasp it, further suggesting that these effects are controlled by covert mechanisms.