Experimental Brain Research

, 215:1 | Cite as

Preceding movement effects on sequential aiming

  • Darian T. Cheng
  • John De Grosbois
  • Jonathan Smirl
  • Matthew Heath
  • Gordon Binsted
Research Article
  • 125 Downloads

Abstract

In this study, two experiments were devised to examine the control strategy used by individuals when performing sequential aiming movements. Of particular interest was the aiming behavior displayed when task difficulty was changed midway through a sequence of movements. In Experiment 1, target size was manipulated, as the targets were made either larger or smaller, between the 8th and 12th movement of the sequence. In Experiment 2, the amplitude between the two targets was similarly changed while the target size remained constant. Results revealed that in Experiment 1, individuals took two movements following the perturbation to target size, to re-tune their movement times in order to correspond with the new task difficulty. Conversely for Experiment 2, movement time changed immediately and in correspondence with the new target amplitude. These findings demonstrate that participants can use information from the preceding movement to prepare and guide subsequent movements—but only when target size is changed. When response amplitude changes mid-sequence, it seems individuals rely more on immediate, target-derived information. Therefore, counter to some current accounts of visual movement control, it appears that memory representations of the preceding movement can guide subsequent movements; however, this information appears selectively accessed in a context-dependent fashion.

Keywords

Movement time Preceding movement effects Manual aiming Vision Index of difficulty Spatial attributes 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

References

  1. Binsted G, Rolheiser TM, Chua R (2006) Decay in visuomotor representations during manual aiming. J Mot Behav 38:82–87. doi: 10.3200/JMBR.38.2.82-87 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brouwer A-M, Knill DC (2007) The role of memory in visually guided reaching. J Vis 7:1–12. doi: 10.1167/7.5.6 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carlton LG (1992) Visual processing time and the control of movement. In: Proteau L, Elliott D (eds) Vision and motor control. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 3–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cheng DT, Luis M, Tremblay L (2008) Randomizing visual feedback in manual aiming: reminiscence of the previous trial condition and prior knowledge of feedback availability. Exp Brain R 189:403–410. doi: 10.1007/s00221-008-1436-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Elliott D, Khan MA (2010) Vision and goal-directed movement: neurobehavioral perspectives. Human Kinetics, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  6. Elliott D, Madalena J (1987) The influence of premovement visual information on manual aiming. Q J Exp Psychol A 39:541–559PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Fernandez L, Warren WH, Bootsma RJ (2006) Kinematic adaptation to sudden changes in visual task constraints during reciprocal aiming. Hum Mov Sci 25:695–717. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2006.05.001 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ferraz de Oliveira R, Huys R, Oudejans RRD, van de Langenberg R, Beek PJ (2007) Basketball jump shooting is controlled online by vision. Exp Psychol 54:108–186. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169.54.3.180 Google Scholar
  9. Fitts PM (1954) The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J Exp Psychol 47:381–391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Glover S (2004) Separate visual representations in the planning and control of action. Behav Brain Sci 27:3–78. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X04000020 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Heath M, Hodges NJ, Chua R, Elliott D (1998) On-line control of rapid aiming movements: unexpected target perturbations, movement kinematics. Can J Exp Psychol 52:163–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jax SA, Rosenbaum DA (2009) Hand path priming in manual obstacle avoidance: rapid decay of dorsal stream information. Neuropsychologia 47:1573–1577. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.05.019 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kandel ER, Schwartz JH, Jessell TM (2000) Principles of neural science, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Kording KP, Wolpert DM (2006) Bayesian decision theory in sensorimotor control. Trends Cogn Sci 10:319–326. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.05.003 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Milner AD, Goodale MA (1995) The visual brain in action. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. Milner AD, Goodale MA (2008) Two visual systems re-viewed. Neuropsychologia 46:774–785PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schmidt RA, Zelaznik H, Hawkins B, Frank JS, Quinn JT (1979) Motor-output variability: a theory for the accuracy of rapid motor acts. Psychol Rev 86:415–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. van der Wel RP, Fleckenstein RM, Jax SA, Rosenbaum DA (2007) Hand path priming in manual obstacle avoidance: evidence for abstract spatiotemporal forms in human motor control. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 33:1117–1126. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.33.5.1117 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Westwood DA, Goodale M (2003) Perceptual illusion and real-time control of action. Spat Vis 16:243–254. doi: 10.1163/156856803322467518 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Westwood DA, Heath M, Roy EA (2003) No evidence for accurate visuomotor memory: systematic and variable error in memory-guided reaching. J Mot Behav 35:127–133. doi: 10.1080/00222890309602128 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Darian T. Cheng
    • 1
  • John De Grosbois
    • 1
  • Jonathan Smirl
    • 1
  • Matthew Heath
    • 2
  • Gordon Binsted
    • 1
  1. 1.University of British ColumbiaKelownaCanada
  2. 2.University of Western OntarioLondonCanada

Personalised recommendations