Abstract
We have shown that the latency to initiate a reaching movement is increased if its direction is the same as a previous movement compared to movements that differ by 90° or 180° (Cowper-Smith and Westwood in Atten Percept Psychophys 75:1914–1922, 2013). An influential study (Taylor and Klein in J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 26:1639–1656, 2000), however, reported the opposite spatial pattern for manual keypress responses: repeated responses on the same side had reduced reaction time compared to responses on opposite sides. In order to determine whether there are fundamental differences in the patterns of spatial interactions between button-pressing responses and reaching movements, we compared both types of manual responses using common methods. Reaching movements and manual keypress responses were performed in separate blocks of trials using consecutive central arrow stimuli that directed participants to respond to left or right targets. Reaction times were greater for manual responses made to the same target as a previous response (M = 390 ms) as compared to the opposite target (M = 365 ms; similarity main effect: p < 0.001) regardless of whether the response was a reaching movement or a keypress response. This finding is broadly consistent with an inhibitory mechanism operating at the level of motor output that discourages movements that achieve the same spatial goal as a recent action.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andersen RA, Buneo CA (2002) Intentional maps in posterior parietal cortex. Ann Rev Neurosci 25:189–220. doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.25.112701.142922
Bennett PJ, Pratt J (2001) The spatial distribution of inhibition of return. Psychol Sci 12:76–80
Biguer B, Jeannerod M, Prablanc C (1982) The coordination of eye, head, and hand movements during reaching at a single target. Exp Brain Res 46:301–304
Carson RG, Chua R, Elliott D, Goodman D (1990) The contribution of vision to asymmetries in manual aiming. Neuropsychologia 28:1215–1220
Cowper-Smith CD, Westwood DA (2013) Motor IOR revealed for reaching. Atten Percept Psychophys 75:1914–1922. doi:10.3758/s13414-013-0528-8
Cowper-Smith CD, Harris JW, Eskes GA, Westwood DA (2013) Spatial interactions between successive eye and arm movements: signal type matters. PLoS One 8:e58850. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0058850
Ferbert A, Priori A, Rothwell JC, Day BL, Colebatch JG, Marsden CD (1992) Interhemispheric inhibition of the human motor cortex. J Physiol 453:525–546
Fischer MH, Pratt J, Neggers SFW (2003) Inhibition of return and manual pointing movements. Percept Psycophys 65:379–387
Fisk JD, Goodale MA (1985) The organization of eye and limb movements during unrestricted reaching to targets in contralateral and ipsilateral visual space. Exp Brain Res 60:159–178
Georgopoulos AP (1995) Current issues in directional motor control. Trends Neurosci 18:506–510
Georgopoulos AP, Carpenter AF (2015) Coding of movements in the motor cortex. Curr Opin Neurobiol 33C:34–39
Gonzalez CL, Ganel T, Goodale MA (2006) Hemispheric specialization for the visual control of action is independent of handedness. J Neurophysiol 95:3496–3501
Grillner S, Wallen P (1985) Central pattern generators for locomotion, with specific reference to vertebrates. Ann Rev Neurosci 8:233–261
Hick WE (1952) On the rate of gain of information. Q J Exp Psychol 4:11–26
Hilchey MD, Klein RM, Ivanoff J (2012) Perceptual and motor inhibition of return: Components or flavors? Atten Percept Psychophys 74:1416–1429
Hyman R (1953) Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. J Exp Psychol 45:188–196
Klein RM (2000) Inhibition of return. Trends Cogn Sci 4:138–146
Posner MI, Cohen Y (1984) Components of visual orienting. In: Bouma H, Bouwhuis DG (eds) Attention and performance X: control of language processes. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 531–556
Rosenbaum DA, Chapman KM, Weigelt M, Weiss DJ, van der Wel R (2012) Cognition, action, and object manipulation. Psychol Bull 138:924–946. doi:10.1037/a0027839
Taylor TL, Klein RM (2000) Visual and motor effects in inhibition of return. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 26:1639–1656
Wise SP, Murray EA (2000) Arbitrary associations between antecedents and actions. Trends Neurosci 23:271–276
Acknowledgments
DAW was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (Canada) Discovery Grant.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
None.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Avery, B., Cowper-Smith, C.D. & Westwood, D.A. Spatial interactions between consecutive manual responses. Exp Brain Res 233, 3283–3290 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-015-4396-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-015-4396-4