Switching tools: perceptual-motor recalibration to weight changes
- 169 Downloads
In order to effectively switch between tools, an actor must re-calibrate perceptual-motor control appropriately for the new tool’s kinetic properties. This study explored changes in perceptual-motor control in response to switching to a tool of a different weight when performing a complex control task with moving objects. In Experiment 1, 30 participants were each randomly assigned to one of three groups in a baseball batting simulation: a standard group that always used the same bat weight (1.08 kg), a Lighter group that switched from the standard bat to a 0.79 kg bat, and a Heavier group that switched from the standard bat to a 1.36 kg bat. For both the Heavier and Lighter groups, temporal swing errors were significantly larger (as compared to the standard group) in the first block of trials following the bat change. Both groups re-calibrated quickly: within 5–10 trials after the bat change there were no significant difference between the groups. Analysis of swing kinematics indicated that the two change groups used different means for re-calibrating perceptual-motor control: the Lighter group altered swing velocity while the Heavier group altered swing onset time. In Experiment 2, when batters switched from a 0.79 kg bat to a 1.08 kg bat, perceptual-motor calibration depended on the recommended bat weight for each participant (Bahill and Freitas in Ann Biomed Eng 23:436–444, 1995): batters with a heavier recommended weight altered swing velocity while batters with a lower recommended weight altered onset time. The strategy used for perceptual-motor recalibration and time required to re-calibrate in a complex motor task is dependent on the action boundaries of the actor.
KeywordsDynamic Exploration Heavy Group Plan Pairwise Comparison Batting Performance Swing Velocity
The work presented here represents part of the M.S. degree requirements completed by author S.S. This research was supported by NSF Grant BCS-0239657 to author R.G.
- Bahill AT, LaRitz T (1984) Why can’t batters keep their eyes on the ball? Am Sci 72:249–253Google Scholar
- Castaneda B, Gray R (2007) Effects of focus of attention on baseball batting performance in players of different skill level. J Sport Exerc Psychol 29:59–76Google Scholar
- DeRenne C, Ho K, Hetzler R, Chai D (1992) Effects of warm up with various weighted implantations on baseball bat swing velocity. J Appl Sport Sci 6:214–218Google Scholar
- Gray R (2006) Visual-motor control in baseball batting. In: Proceedings of the North American meeting of the international society for ecological psychology, June 22–24, 2006Google Scholar
- Gray R, Beilock SL, Carr TM (2007) As soon as the bat met the ball, I knew it was gone: outcome prediction, hindsight bias, and the representation and control of action in novice and expert baseball players. Psychol Bull Rev 14:669–675Google Scholar
- Scott S, Gray R (2007) Specificity of practice in baseball batting. J Sport Exerc Psychol 29SGoogle Scholar
- Watts RG, Bahill AT (1991) Keep your eye on the ball: curve balls, knuckleballs, and fallacies of baseball. W.H. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Will GF (1990) Men at work. MacMillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar