Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 233, Issue 9, pp 2673–2683 | Cite as

Reduced motor preparation during dual-task performance: evidence from startle

  • Dana Maslovat
  • Neil M. Drummond
  • Michael J. Carter
  • Anthony N. Carlsen
Research Article

Abstract

Previous studies have used a secondary probe reaction time (RT) task to assess attentional demands of a primary task. The current study used a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) in a probe RT paradigm to test the hypothesis that attentional resources would be directly related to limitations in response preparation. Participants performed an easy or difficult version of a continuous primary task that was either primarily motor in nature (pursuit tracking) or cognitive (counting backward). Concurrently, participants responded to an auditory cue as fast as possible by performing a wrist extension secondary movement. On selected trials, the auditory cue was replaced with a SAS (120 dB), which is thought to involuntarily trigger a prepared response and thus bypass any response initiation bottleneck that may be present when trying to perform two movements. Although startle trials were performed at a shorter latency, both non-startle and startle probe trials resulted in a delayed RT, as compared to single-task trials, consistent with reduced preparation of the secondary task. In addition, analysis of SAS trial RT when a startle indicator was present versus absent provided evidence that the secondary task was at a lowered state of preparation when engaged in the cognitive primary task as compared to a motor primary task, suggesting a facilitative effect on preparatory activation when both the primary and secondary tasks are motoric in nature.

Keywords

Activation Attention Dual-task Probe reaction time Preparation Startle 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) discovery grant awarded to ANC (RGPIN: 418361-2012). We would also like to acknowledge the assistance of two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.

References

  1. Alibiglou L, MacKinnon CD (2012) The early release of planned movement by acoustic startle can be delayed by transcranial magnetic stimulation over motor cortex. J Physiol 590:919–936PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Begeman M, Kumru H, Leenders K, Valls-Sole J (2007) Unilateral reaction time task is delayed during contralateral movements. Exp Brain Res 181:469–475CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bratzke D, Rolke B, Ulrich R (2009) The source of execution-related dual-task interference: motor bottleneck or response monitoring? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 35:1413–1426CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown P, Rothwell JC, Thompson PD, Britton TC, Day BL, Marsden CD (1991) New observations on the normal auditory startle reflex in man. Brain 114:1891–1902CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Carlsen AN, Mackinnon CD (2010) Motor preparation is modulated by the resolution of the response timing information. Brain Res 1322:38–49CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Carlsen AN, Chua R, Inglis JT, Sanderson DJ, Franks IM (2004) Can prepared responses be stored subcortically? Exp Brain Res 159:301–309CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Carlsen AN, Dakin CJ, Chua R, Franks IM (2007) Startle produces early response latencies that are distinct from stimulus intensity effects. Exp Brain Res 176:199–205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlsen AN, Chua R, Inglis JT, Sanderson DJ, Franks IM (2009) Differential effects of startle on reaction time for finger and arm movements. J Neurophysiol 101:306–314PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 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 35:366–376CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlsen AN, Maslovat D, Franks IM (2012) Preparation for voluntary movement in healthy and clincial populations: evidence from startle. Clin Neurophysiol 123:21–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. De Jong R (1993) Multiple bottlenecks in overlapping task performance. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 19:965–980CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Drummond NM, Carlsen AN, Cressman EK (2013) Motor preparation is delayed for both directly and indirectly cued movements during an anticipation-timing task. Brain Res 1506:44–57CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Drummond NM, Cressman EK, Carlsen AN (2015) Inhibition of motor-related activation during a simple reaction time task requiring visuomotor mental rotation. Behav Neurosci 129:160–169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Glencross DJ (1978) Response planning and the organization of speed movements. In: Nickerson RS (ed) Attention and performance VII. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 107–125Google Scholar
  15. Hanes DP, Schall JD (1996) Neural control of voluntary movement initiation. Science 274:427–430CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Honeycutt CF, Kharouta M, Perreault EJ (2013) Evidence for reticulospinal contributions to coordinated finger movements in humans. J Neurophysiol 110:1476–1483PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Honeycutt CF, Tresch UA, Perreault EJ (2015) Startling acoustic stimuli can evoke fast hand extension movements in stroke survivors. Clin Neurophysiol 126:160–164CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kahneman D (1973) Attention and effort. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  19. Keele SW (1973) Attention and human performance. Goodyear, PalisadesGoogle Scholar
  20. Kerr B (1973) Processing demands during mental operations. Mem Cogn 1:401–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kumru H, Urra X, Compta Y, Castellote JM, Turbau J, Valls-Solé J (2006) Excitability of subcortical motor circuits in Go/noGo and forced choice reaction time tasks. Neurosci Lett 406:66–70CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee TD, Elliott D (1986) Probing the motor program: effects of output competition during movement preparation. Hum Mov Sci 5:173–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. MacKinnon CD, Bissig D, Chiusano J et al (2007) Preparation of anticipatory postural adjustments prior to stepping. J Neurophysiol 97:4368–4379CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Maslovat D, Carlsen AN, Franks IM (2012) Subcortical motor circuit excitability during simple and choice reaction time. Behav Neurosci 126:499–503CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Maslovat D, Chua R, Spencer HC, Forgaard CJ, Carlsen AN, Franks IM (2013) Evidence for a response preparation bottleneck during dual-task performance: effect of a startling acoustic stimulus on the psychological refractory period. Acta Psychol 144:481–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Maslovat D, Carter MJ, Kennefick M, Carlsen AN (2014a) Startle neural activity is additive with normal cortical initiation-related activation. Neurosci Lett 558:164–168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Maslovat D, Klapp ST, Jagacinski RJ, Franks IM (2014b) Control of response timing occurs during the simple reaction time interval but on-line for choice reaction time. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 40:2005–2021CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Maslovat D, Franks IM, Leguerrier A, Carlsen AN (2015) Responses to startling acoustic stimuli indicate that movement-related activation is constant prior to action: a replication with an alternate interpretation. Physiol Rep 3:e12300PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. McLeod P (1977) A dual task response modality effect: support for multiprocessor models of attention. Q J Exp Psychol 29:651–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McLeod P (1980) What can probe RT tell us about the attentional demands of movement? In: Stelmach GE, Requin J (eds) Tutorials in motor behavior. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 579–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Morey RD (2008) Confidence intervals from normalized data: a correction to Cousineau (2005). Tutor Quant Methods Psychol 4:61–64Google Scholar
  32. Pashler HE (1994) Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. Psychol Bull 116:220–244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Posner MI, Keele SW (1969) Attentional demands of movement. In: Proceedings of the 16th congress of applied psychology. Swets and Zeitlinger, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  34. Schafer JL, Graham JW (2002) Missing data: our view of the state of the art. Psychol Methods 7:147–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Valls-Solé J, Rothwell JC, Goulart FR, Cossu G (1999) Patterned ballistic movements triggered by a startle in healthy humans. J Physiol 516:931–938PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Valls-Solé J, Kumru H, Kofler M (2008) Interaction between startle and voluntary reactions in humans. Exp Brain Res 187:497–507CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Wickens J, Hyland B, Anson G (1994) Cortical cell assemblies: a possible mechanism for motor programs. J Mot Behav 26:66–82CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Woodworth RS (1938) Experimental Psychology. Holt, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dana Maslovat
    • 1
    • 2
  • Neil M. Drummond
    • 3
  • Michael J. Carter
    • 3
  • Anthony N. Carlsen
    • 3
  1. 1.School of KinesiologyUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Department of KinesiologyLangara CollegeVancouverCanada
  3. 3.School of Human KineticsUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations