Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 215, Issue 3–4, pp 235–245 | Cite as

Default motor preparation under conditions of response uncertainty

  • Christopher J. Forgaard
  • Dana Maslovat
  • Anthony N. Carlsen
  • Ian M. Franks
Research Article

Abstract

In a choice reaction time (RT) paradigm, providing partial advance information (a precue) about the upcoming response has been shown to decrease RT, presumably due to preprogramming of the precued parameters. When advance information about a particular aspect of a movement is provided (precued), several different strategies might be used to prepare the motor system during the foreperiod. For example, in studies where response preparation time was manipulated, precues were provided specifying the required arm and direction but movement amplitude was left uncertain. In this case it was shown that a default movement was preprogrammed whose amplitude was intermediate between the alternatives (Favilla et al. in Exp Brain Res 75(2):280–294, 1989, Exp Brain Res 79(3):530–538, 1990; Ghez et al. in Exp Brain Res 115(2):217–233, 1997). However, this strategy did not appear to be used in a RT task since there was an absence of online adjustments to movement. Therefore, it appeared movements were not initiated until all parameters had been correctly specified and programmed by the nervous system (Bock and Arnold in Exp Brain Res 90:(1):209–216, 1992). The present study reinvestigated the notion of a default movement preparation strategy in a choice RT paradigm, employing the triggering effect of a startling acoustic stimulus. On control trials (80 dB imperative stimulus), the movements were initiated toward the correct targets. Providing a startle stimulus (124 dB) resulted in the early initiation of a “default” movement whose amplitude fell in between the potential response alternatives. Thus, the current experiment found behavioral evidence of default intermediate-amplitude movement preparation as a strategy under conditions of response amplitude uncertainty.

Keywords

Motor preparation Startle Precue Default preparation Reaction time 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) awarded to I.M.F. and an NSERC Undergraduate Student Research Award (USRA) conferred to C.J.F. We would like to thank Dr. Digby Elliott and two anonymous reviewers for comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

References

  1. Bock O, Arnold K (1992) Motor control prior to movement onset: preparatory mechanisms for pointing at visual targets. Exp Brain Res 90(1):209–216. doi: 10.1007/bf00229273 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carlsen AN, Chua R, Inglis JT, Sanderson DJ, Franks IM (2004a) Can prepared responses be stored subcortically? Exp Brain Res 159(3):301–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carlsen AN, Chua R, Inglis JT, Sanderson DJ, Franks IM (2004b) Prepared movements are elicited early by startle. J Mot Behav 36(3):253–264PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carlsen AN, Chua R, Summers JJ, Inglis JT, Sanderson DJ, Franks IM (2009) Precues enable multiple response preprogramming: evidence from startle. Psychophysiology 46(2):241–251. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2008.00764.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carlsen AN, Maslovat D, Lam MY, Chua R, Franks IM (2011) Considerations for the use of a startling acoustic stimulus in studies of motor preparation in humans. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 35(3):366–376. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.04.009 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carlsen AN, Maslovat D, Franks IM (in press) Preparation for voluntary movement in healthy and clinical populations: evidence from startle. Clin NeurophysiolGoogle Scholar
  7. Elliott D, Carson RG, Goodman D, Chua R (1991) Discrete vs. continuous visual control of manual aiming. Hum Mov Sci 10(4):393–418. doi: 10.1016/0167-9457(91)90013-n CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Favilla M, Hening W, Ghez C (1989) Trajectory control in targeted force impulses. Exp Brain Res 75(2):280–294. doi: 10.1007/bf00247934 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Favilla M, Gordon J, Hening W, Ghez C (1990) Trajectory control in targeted force impulses. Exp Brain Res 79(3):530–538. doi: 10.1007/bf00229322 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ghez C, Favilla M, Ghilardi MF, Gordon J, Bermejo R, Pullman S (1997) Discrete and continuous planning of hand movements and isometric force trajectories. Exp Brain Res 115(2):217–233. doi: 10.1007/pl00005692 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goodman D, Kelso JS (1980) Are movements prepared in parts? Not under compatible (naturalized) conditions. J Exp Psychol Gen 109(4):475–495. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.109.4.475 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gottlieb GL, Corcos DM, Agarwal GC (1989) Strategies for the control of voluntary movements with one mechanical degree of freedom. Behav Brain Sci 12:189–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Klapp ST (1996) Reaction time analysis of central motor control. In: Zelaznik HN (ed) Advances in motor learning and control. Human Kinetics, Champaign, pp 13–35Google Scholar
  14. Kumru H, Urra X, Compta Y, Castellote JM, Turbau J, Valls-Solé J (2006) Excitability of subcortical motor circuits in Go/no Go and forced choice reaction time tasks. Neurosci Lett 406:66–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Latash ML, Gottlieb GL (1991) An equilibrium-point model for fast, single-joint movement: similarity of single-joint isometric and isotonic descending commands. J Mot Behav 23(3):179–191PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maslovat D, Hodges NJ, Chua R, Franks IM (2011) Motor preparation and the effects of practice: evidence from startle. Behav Neurosci (Advance online publication). doi: 10.1037/a0022567 Google Scholar
  17. Maslovat D, Hodges NJ, Chua R, Franks IM (in press) Motor preparation of spatially and temporally defined movements: evidence from startle. J NeurophysiolGoogle Scholar
  18. Nijhuis LBO, Janssen L, Bloem BR, Van Dijk JG, Gielen SC, Borm GF, Overeem S (2007) Choice reaction times for human head rotations are shortened by startling acoustic stimuli, irrespective of stimulus direction. J Physiol 584(1):97–109. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2007.136291 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Reynolds RF, Day BL (2007) Fast visuomotor processing made faster by sound. J Physiol 583(3):1107–1115. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2007.136192 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rosenbaum DA (1980) Human movement initiation: specification of arm, direction, and extent. J Exp Psychol Gen 109(4):444–474PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Valls-Solé J, Rothwell JC, Goulart F, Cossu G, Muñoz E (1999) Patterned ballistic movements triggered by a startle in healthy humans. J Physiol 516(3):931–938. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7793.1999.0931u.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Valls-Solé J, Kumru H, Kofler M (2008) Interaction between startle and voluntary reactions in humans. Exp Brain Res 187(4):497–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wadman WJ, Dernier van der Gon JJ, Geuze RH, Mol CR (1979) Control of fast goal-directed arm movements. J Hum Mov Stud 5:3–17Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher J. Forgaard
    • 1
  • Dana Maslovat
    • 1
  • Anthony N. Carlsen
    • 2
  • Ian M. Franks
    • 1
  1. 1.School of KinesiologyUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.School of Human KineticsUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations