Relationship Between the Reaction Time and EEG Parameters During Judgments on the Correspondence of Delayed or Simultaneously Presented Images of Two Models
Abstract
This study examined how judging whether the poses of two figures are the same in tasks with delayed and simultaneous image presentation affects the participants’ reaction times and electroencephalograms (EEGs). Eighteen university students performed a delayed task, in which an image of a doll was first presented for 3 sec followed by a second image of the doll, and a simultaneous task, in which images of two dolls were presented on the left and right sides of the monitor at the same time. The dolls were shown from the front and rear angles. The participants were instructed to judge whether the images were the same as accurately and quickly as possible, and the reaction times were recorded. EEG signals were recorded from Fp1, Fp2, F3, F4, C3, C4, P3, and P4. The reaction times in the delayed task were found to be shorter then those in the simultaneous task, and that these times for the 0° condition were shorter than for the 180° condition. The amplitudes of EEG responses at Fp1 and Fp2 were larger than those at other electrodes, and the responses in the right hemisphere during the 180° condition and the delayed task within the α1 frequency band were smaller than the responses at other electrodes. These results indicate that cerebral activity in the frontal region of the right hemisphere is associated with the judgment of correspondence or non-correspondence in spatial compatibility tasks.
Keywords
visual perception spatial correspondence judgment viewing angle electroencephalographyPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.P. McCullagh and M. Weiss, “Modeling: considerations for motor skill performance and psychological responses,” in: Handbook of Sport Psychology, R. N. Singer, H. A. Hausenblas, and C. M. Janelle (eds.), John Wiley and Sons, New York (2001), pp. 205-238.Google Scholar
- 2.T. Ishikura and K. Inomata, “Effects of angle of modeldemonstration on learning of motor skill,” Percept. Mot. Skills, 80, 651-658 (1995).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 3.R. N. Shepard and J. Metzler, “Mental rotation of threedimentional objects,” Science, 171, 701-703 (1971).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.M. Heil, J. Bajrić, F. Rösler, and E. Hennighausen, “A rotation after effect changes both the speed and the preferred direction of mental rotation,” J. Exp. Psychol. Human Percept. Perform., 23, 681-692 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.D. L. Weeks, A. K. Hall, and L. P. Anderson, “A comparison of imitation strategies in observational learning of action patterns,” J. Mot. Behav., 28, No. 4, 348-358 (1996).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.J. R. Richardson and T. D. Lee, “The effects of proactive and retroactive demonstrations on learning signed letters,” Acta Psychol., 101, 79-90 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.M. Heil, “The functional significance of ERP effects during mental rotation,” Psychophysiology, 39, 535-545 (2002).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.B. Krüger, M. Bischoff, C. Blecker, et al., “Parietal and premotor cortices: activation reflects imitation accuracy during observation, delayed imitation and concurrent imitation,” NeuroImage, 100, 39-50 (2014).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.K. Stefan, J. Classen, P. Celnik, and L. G. Cohen, “Concurrent action observation modulates practiceinduced motor memory formation,” Eur. J. Neurosci., 27, 730-738 (2008).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.D. Brang, L. E. Miller, M. McQuire, et al., “Enhanced mental rotation ability in time-space synesthesia,” Cogn. Process., 14, 429-434 (2013).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.K. Dhindsa, V. Drobinin, J. King, et al., “Examining the role of the temporo-parietal network in memory, imagery, and viewpoint transformations,” Front. Human Neurosci., 8, 709 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar