Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 29, 2026

10:51
Frame-by-Frame Video Analysis of Idiosyncratic Reach-to-Grasp Movements in Humans
Published on: January 15, 2018
Illusion effects on grasping are temporally constant not dynamic
V H Franz1, F Scharnowski, K R Gegenfurtner
1Department of General and Experimental Psychology, University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany. volker.franz@psychol.uni-giessen.de
Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance
|December 22, 2005
Summary
The Ebbinghaus illusion does not affect grasping movements, even with vision. Previous findings of correction were due to methodological flaws, refuting specific action planning models.
Area of Science:
- Cognitive Psychology
- Motor Control
- Visual Perception
Background:
- The Ebbinghaus illusion demonstrates how surrounding context influences perceived object size.
- Previous research suggested visual illusions could be corrected during the late stages of grasping movements.
- This correction was thought to support specific models of action planning and control.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate whether the Ebbinghaus illusion's effect on grasping is corrected during the late phases of movement.
- To re-evaluate previous findings and identify potential artifacts in earlier studies.
- To refine understanding of motor control theories.
Main Methods:
- Participants (N=52 no-vision, N=48 full-vision) performed grasping movements towards a target.
- Grasp aperture was measured under different visual conditions.
- Statistical analyses were performed to identify movement corrections.
Main Results:
- Grasp aperture was not corrected for the Ebbinghaus illusion in either no-vision or full-vision conditions.
- Previous reports of correction were attributed to artifacts, including late time points and erroneous statistics.
- The central evidence for the Glover and Dixon (2001a) planning-control model was invalidated.
Conclusions:
- The Ebbinghaus illusion does not influence the late phases of grasping movements.
- Methodological artifacts in prior studies led to incorrect conclusions about motor correction.
- Classic online-control theories remain viable, while specific planning-control models are challenged.

