Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 65, Issue 2, pp 471–478 | Cite as

Accuracy of voluntary movements at the thumb and elbow joints

  • G. De Domenico
  • D. I. McCloskey


Subjects made simultaneously movements from a common rest position and attempted to align corresponding joints (elbow joints, or distal joints of thumb), on opposite sides of the body. When misalignments were expressed in angular terms, variability of performance within and between subjects was greater for thumb than for elbow joints. When the misalignments were expressed in terms of linear misalignment at the end of the moved lever arms, variability of performance within and between subjects was less for thumb than elbow joints. However, when the misalignments were expressed in terms of mean proportional changes in the lengths of fascicles in muscles operating at the joints, variabilities of performances at both joints were similar. In another test, subjects made small unloaded movements at either the elbow joint or the distal thumb joint to guide a cursor along a narrow path. When the movement task was made similar for the elbow and thumb joints in terms of either the angular excursion required, or the required linear excursion of the moved lever tip, accuracy of performances at the two joints varied greatly. Only when the tasks were similar in terms of the mean proportional changes of length in fascicles of muscles operating at the joints, were performances at the two joints of similar accuracy. The results suggest that proportional change in muscle fascicle length is a significant variable for the CNS in proprioception and the control of voluntary movement.

Key words

Motor control Proprioception Accuracy Muscles Joints 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Goldscheider A (1889) Untersuchungen über den Muskelsinn. Arch Anat Physiol 3: 369–502Google Scholar
  2. Hall LA, McCloskey DI (1983) Detections of movements imposed on finger, elbow and shoulder joints. J Physiol (Lond) 335: 519–533Google Scholar
  3. McCloskey DI (1978) Kinesthetic sensibility. Physiol Rev 58: 563–820Google Scholar
  4. McCloskey DI (1983) Proprioception and control of movement in man. Proc Int Union Physiol Sci 15: 464Google Scholar
  5. McCloskey DI, De Domenico G, Hall LA (1982) Muscle lengths, propriocepetion, and the accuracy of voluntary movements. Neurosci Lett 8: S15Google Scholar
  6. Rack PMH, Ross HF (1984) The tendon of flexor pollicis longus: its effects on the muscular control of force and position at the human thumb. J Physiol (Lond) 351: 99–110Google Scholar
  7. Slinger RT, Horsely V (1906) Upon the orientation of points in space by the muscular, arthrodial, and tactile senses of the upper limbs in normal individuals and in blind persons. Brain 29: 1–27Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. De Domenico
    • 1
  • D. I. McCloskey
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Physiology and PharmacologyUniversity of New South WalesKensingtonAustralia

Personalised recommendations