{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015737704918032787, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.384937238493724, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Hand Sees Visual Periphery Better Than the Eye: Motor-Dependent Visual Motion Analyses

Information pertaining to visual motion is used in the brain not only for conscious perception but also for various kinds of motor controls. In contrast to the increasing amount of evidence supporting the dissociation of visual processing for action versus perception, it is less clear whether the analysis of visual input is shared for characterizing various motor outputs, which require different kinds of interactions with environments. Here we show that, in human visuomotor control, motion analysis for quick hand control is distinct from that for quick eye control in terms of spatiotemporal analysis and spatial integration. The amplitudes of implicit and quick hand and eye responses induced by visual motion stimuli differently varied with stimulus size and pattern smoothness (e.g., spatial frequency). Surprisingly, the hand response did not decrease even when the visual motion with a coarse pattern was mostly occluded over the visual center, whereas the eye response markedly decreased. Since these contrasts cannot be ascribed to any difference in motor dynamics, they clearly indicate different spatial integration of visual motion for the individual motor systems. Going against the overly unified hierarchical view of visual analysis, our data suggest that visual motion analyses are separately tailored from early levels to individual motor modalities. Namely, the hand and eyes see the external world differently.