Abstract
Visual selective attention is thought to underly inhibitory control during pointing movements. Accounts of inhibitory control during pointing movements make differential predictions about movement deviations towards or away from highly salient non-target flankers based on their potential cortical activation and subsequent inhibition: (1) Tipper et al. (Vis Cogn 4:1–38, 1997) “response vector model” predicts movements away from highly salient flankers; (2) Welsh and Elliott’s (Q J Exp Psychol 57:1031–1057, 2004a and J Mot Behav 36:200–211, 2004b) “response activation model” predicts movements towards highly salient flankers early in the response, that is resolved by a race for inhibition. To eliminate the confounds of physical properties, such as obstacle avoidance and information cues of non-target objects, pointing was conducted in a virtual environment (graphical user interface). Participants were 14 skilled computer users who moved a computer cursor with a mouse to virtual targets. Analysis revealed non-target flankers significantly interfered with movement consistent with action centred selective attention, and reflecting a proximity-to-hand effect. Spatial analysis revealed evidence of highly salient flankers attracting movement, and less salient flankers repelling movement, supporting Welsh and Elliott’s response activation model. These effects were achieved in a virtual 2D environment where interference caused by the physical properties of objects was less cogent.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chang SW, Abrams RA (2004) Hand movements deviate toward distracters in the absence of response competition. J Gen Psychol 131(4):328–344
Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Erlbaum, Hillsdale
Cordo PJ, Nashner LM (1982) Properties of postural adjustments associated with rapid arm movements. J Neurophysiol 47:287–302
Finch MA, Phillips JG, Meehan JW (2007) Effects of compatibility and turning biases on arrowhead cursor placement in graphical user interfaces. Comput Hum Behav
Georgopoulos AP (1990) Neurophysiology of reaching. In: Jeannerod M (ed) Attention and performance XIII. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, pp 227–263
Howard L, Tipper SP (1997) Hand deviations away from visual cues: indirect evidence for inhibition. Exp Brain Res 113:144–152
Kritikos A, Bennett KMB, Dunai J, Castiello U (2000) Interference from distractors in reach-to-grasp movements. Q J Exp Psychol 53A:131–151
Lacquaniti F (1996) Neural control of limb mechanics for visuomanual coordination. In: Wing AM, Haggard P, Flanagan JR (ed) Hand and brain. Academic, San Diego, pp. 213–237
Lyons J, Elliott D, Ricker KL, Weeks TN, Chua R (1999) Action-centred attention in virtual environments. Can J Exp Psychol 53:176–187
Meegan DV, Tipper SP (1998) Reaching into cluttered visual environments: spatial and temporal influences of distracting objects. Q J Exp Psychol 51:225–249
Nagylaki T (1973) Sampling truncated distributions. Behav Genet 3:193–196
Paulignan Y, Jeannerod M (1996) Prehension movements: the visuomotor channels hypothesis revisited. In: Wing AM, Haggard P, Flanagan JR (eds) Hand and brain. Academic, San Diego, pp 265–282
Phillips JG, Triggs TJ (2001) Characteristics of cursor trajectories controlled by the computer mouse. Ergonomics 44:527–536
Phillips JG, Triggs TJ, Meehan JW (2005) Forward/up directional incompatibilities during cursor placement within graphical user interfaces. Ergonomics 48:722–735
Pratt J, Abrams RA (1994) Action-centered inhibition: effects of distractors on movement planning and execution. Hum Mov Sci 13:245–254
Rizzolatti G, Riggio L, Sheliga BM (1994) Space and selective attention. In: Umilta C, Moscovitch M (eds) Attention and performance XV. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 231–265
Stelmach GE, Phillips J, Di Fabio RP, Teasdale N (1989) Age, functional postural reflexes and voluntary sway. J Gerontol Biol Sci 44:B100–106
Tipper SP, Lortie C, Baylis GC (1992) Selective reaching: evidence for action-centered attention. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 18:891–905
Tipper SP, Howard LA, Jackson SR (1997) Selective reaching to grasp: evidence for distractor interference effects. Vis Cogn 4:1–38
Tipper SP, Howard LA, Houghton G (2000) Behavioral consequences of selection from neural population codes. In: Monsell S, Driver J (eds) Attention and performance, XVIII. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 223–245
Tipper SP, Howard LA, Paul MA (2001) Reaching affects saccade trajectories. Exp Brain Res 136(2):241–9
Tresilian JR (1998) Attention in action or obstruction of movement? A kinematic analysis of avoidance behavior in prehension. Exp Brain Res 120:352–368
Triggs TJ (1980) The influence of oncoming vehicles on automobile lateral position. Hum Factors 22:427–433
Weir PL, Weeks DJ, Welsh TN, Elliott D, Chua R et al (2003) Influence of terminal action requirements on action-centered distractor effects. Exp Brain Res 149:207–213
Welsh TN, Elliott D (2004a) Movement trajectories in the presence of a distracting stimulus: evidence for a response activation model of selective reaching. Q J Exp Psychol 57:1031–1057
Welsh TN, Elliott D (2004b) Effects of response priming and inhibition on movement planning and execution. J Mot Behav 36:200–211
Welsh TN, Elliott D (2005) The effects of response priming on the planning and execution of goal-directed movements in the presence of a distracting stimulus. Acta Psychol 119:123–142
Welsh TN, Elliott D, Weeks DJ (1999) Hand deviations toward distractors: evidence for response competition. Exp Brain Res 127:207–212
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Carr, S.M., Phillips, J.G. & Meehan, J.W. Non-target flanker effects on movement in a virtual action centred reference frame. Exp Brain Res 184, 95–103 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-007-1078-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-007-1078-x