Advertisement

Psychological Research

, Volume 55, Issue 4, pp 291–298 | Cite as

The role of impulse variability in manual-aiming asymmetries

  • Richard G. Carson
  • Digby Elliott
  • David Goodman
  • Linda Thyer
  • Romeo Chua
  • Eric A. Roy
Article

Summary

Two experiments are reported in which we examined the hypothesis that the advantage of the right hand in target aiming arises from differences in impulse variability. Subjects made aiming movements with the left and right hands. The force requirements of the movements were manipulated through the addition of mass to the limb (Experiments 1 and 2) and through control of movement amplitude (Experiment 1). Although the addition of mass diminished performance (i. e., it increased movement times in Experiment 1 and increased error in Experiment 2), the two hands were not differently affected by the manipulation of required force. In spite of the fact that the right hand exhibited enhanced performance (i. e., lower movement times in Experiment 1 and greater accuracy in Experiment 2), these advantages were not reflected in kinematic measures of impulse variability.

Keywords

Movement Time Great Accuracy Movement Amplitude Force Requirement Lower Movement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Annett, J., Annett, M., Hudson, P. T. W., & Turner, A. (1979). The control of movement in the preferred and non-preferred hands. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 31, 641–652.Google Scholar
  2. Carson, R. G., Chua, R., Elliott, D., & Goodman, D. (1990). The contribution of vision to asymmetries in manual aiming. Neuropsychologia, 28, 1215–1220.Google Scholar
  3. Elliott, D. (1991). Human handedness reconsidered. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 341–342Google Scholar
  4. Flowers, K. (1975). Handedness and controlled movement. British Journal of Psychology, 66, 39–52.Google Scholar
  5. Georgopoulos, A. P., Kalaska, J. F., & Massey, J. T. (1981). Spatial trajectories and reaction times of aimed movements: Effects of practice, uncertainty, and change in target location. Journal of Neurophysiology, 46, 725–743.Google Scholar
  6. Meyer, D. E., Smith, J. E. K., & Wright, C. E. (1982). Models for the speed and accuracy of aimed movements. Psychological Review, 89, 449–482.Google Scholar
  7. Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–113.Google Scholar
  8. Pepper, R. L., & Herman, L. M. (1970). Decay and interference effects in the short-term retention of a discrete motor act. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 83 (Monograph Supplement 2).Google Scholar
  9. Peters, M. (1980). Why the preferred hand taps more quickly than the non-preferred hand: Three experiments on handedness. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34, 62–71.Google Scholar
  10. Roy, E. A., & Elliott, D. (1986). Manual asymmetries in visually directed aiming. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 40, 109–121.Google Scholar
  11. Roy, E. A., & Elliott, D. (1989). Manual asymmetries in aimed movements. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41A, 501–516.Google Scholar
  12. Schmidt, R. A., Sherwood, D. E., Zelaznik, H. N., & Leikind, B. J. (1985). Speed-accuracy trade-offs in motor behavior: Theories of impulse variability. In H. Heuer, U. Kleinbeck, & K.-H. Schmidt (Eds.), Motor behavior: Programming, control and acquisition. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  13. Schmidt, R. A., Zelaznik, H. N., Hawkins, B., Frank, J. S., & Quinn, J. T. (1979). Motor output variability: A theory for the accuracy of rapid motor acts. Psychological Review, 86, 415–451.Google Scholar
  14. Todor, J. I., & Cisneros, J. (1985). Accommodation to increased accuracy demands by the right and left hands. Journal of Motor Behavior, 17, 355–372.Google Scholar
  15. Todor, J. I., & Doane, T. (1978). Handedness and hemispheric asymmetry in the control of movements. Journal of Motor Behavior, 10, 295–300.Google Scholar
  16. Wood, G. A. (1982). Data smoothing and differentiation procedures in biomechanics. Exercise and Sports Sciences Reviews, 10, 308–362.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard G. Carson
    • 1
  • Digby Elliott
    • 2
  • David Goodman
    • 1
  • Linda Thyer
    • 1
  • Romeo Chua
    • 1
  • Eric A. Roy
    • 3
  1. 1.School of KinesiologySimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada
  2. 2.Department of Physical EducationMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  3. 3.Department of KinesiologyUniversity of WaterlooKitchenerCanada

Personalised recommendations