Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 236, Issue 4, pp 1149–1159 | Cite as

Goal-directed reaching: the allocentric coding of target location renders an offline mode of control

  • Joseph Manzone
  • Matthew Heath
Research Article

Abstract

Reaching to a veridical target permits an egocentric spatial code (i.e., absolute limb and target position) to effect fast and effective online trajectory corrections supported via the visuomotor networks of the dorsal visual pathway. In contrast, a response entailing decoupled spatial relations between stimulus and response is thought to be primarily mediated via an allocentric code (i.e., the position of a target relative to another external cue) laid down by the visuoperceptual networks of the ventral visual pathway. Because the ventral stream renders a temporally durable percept, it is thought that an allocentric code does not support a primarily online mode of control, but instead supports a mode wherein a response is evoked largely in advance of movement onset via central planning mechanisms (i.e., offline control). Here, we examined whether reaches defined via ego- and allocentric visual coordinates are supported via distinct control modes (i.e., online versus offline). Participants performed target-directed and allocentric reaches in limb visible and limb-occluded conditions. Notably, in the allocentric task, participants reached to a location that matched the position of a target stimulus relative to a reference stimulus, and to examine online trajectory amendments, we computed the proportion of variance explained (i.e., R2 values) by the spatial position of the limb at 75% of movement time relative to a response’s ultimate movement endpoint. Target-directed trials performed with limb vision showed more online corrections and greater endpoint precision than their limb-occluded counterparts, which in turn were associated with performance metrics comparable to allocentric trials performed with and without limb vision. Accordingly, we propose that the absence of ego-motion cues (i.e., limb vision) and/or the specification of a response via an allocentric code renders motor output served via the ‘slow’ visuoperceptual networks of the ventral visual pathway.

Keywords

Allocentric Egocentric Online control Reaching Vision 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Supported by a Discovery Grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and Faculty Scholar and Major Academic Development Fund Awards from the University of Western Ontario.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

No competing financial interests involved.

References

  1. Binsted G, Heath M (2004) Can the motor system utilize a stored representation to control movement? Behav Brain Sci 27:25–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brainard DH (1997) The psychophysics toolbox. Spat Vis 10:433–436CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bridgeman B, Lewis S, Heit G, Nagle M (1979) Relation between cognitive and motor-oriented systems of visual position perception. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 5:692CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bryden MP (1977) Measuring handedness with questionnaires. Neuropsychologia 15:617–624CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Day BL, Lyon IN (2000) Voluntary modification of automatic arm movements evoked by motion of a visual target. Exp Brain Res 130:159–168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Desmurget M, Rossetti Y, Prablanc C, Jeannerod M, Stelmach GE (1995) Representation of hand position prior to movement and motor variability. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 73:262–272CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Elliott D, Madalena J (1987) The influence of premovement visual information on manual aiming. Q J Exp Psychol A 39:541–559CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Elliott D, Binsted G, Heath M (1999) The control of goal-directed limb movements: correcting errors in the trajectory. Hum Mov Sci 18:121–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elliott D, Helsen WF, Chua R (2001) A century later: Woodworth’s (1899) two-component model of goal-directed aiming. Psychol Bull 127:342–357CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Elliott D, Hansen S, Grierson LE, Lyons J, Bennett SJ, Hayes SJ (2010) Goal-directed aiming: two components but multiple processes. Psychol Bull 136:1023CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Fitts PM (1954) The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J Exp Psychol 47:381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Georgopoulos AP (1991) Higher order motor control. Annu Rev Neurosci 14:361–377CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Goodale MA (2014) How (and why) the visual control of action differs from visual perception. Proc Biol Sci 281:20140337CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodale MA, Westwood DA (2004) An evolving view of duplex vision: separate but interacting cortical pathways for perception and action. Curr Opin Neurobiol 14:203–211CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Goodale MA, Pelisson D, Prablanc C (1986) Large adjustments in visually guided reaching do not depend on vision of the hand or perception of target displacement. Nature 320:748–750CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gréa H, Pisella L, Rossetti Y, Desmurget M, Tilikete C, Grafton S, Prablanc C, Vighetto A (2002) A lesion of the posterior parietal cortex disrupts on-line adjustments during aiming movements. Neuropsychologia 40:2471–2480CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Heath M (2005) Role of limb and target vision in the online control of memory-guided reaches. Mot Control 9:281–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heath M, Westwood DA (2003) Can a visual representation support the online control of memory-dependent reaching? Evidence from a variable spatial mapping paradigm. Mot Control 7:349–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heath M, Westwood DA, Binsted G (2004) The control of memory-guided reaching movements in peripersonal space. Mot Control 8:76–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heath M, Maraj A, Gradkowski A, Binsted G (2009) Anti-pointing is mediated by a perceptual bias of target location in left and right visual space. Exp Brain Res 192:275–286CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Heath M, Dunham K, Binsted G, Godbolt B (2010a) Antisaccades exhibit diminished online control relative to prosaccades. Exp Brain Res 203:743–752CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Heath M, Neely K, Krigolson O, Binsted G (2010b) Memory-guided reaching: what the visuomotor system knows and how long it knows it. In: Elliott D, Khan M (eds) Vision and movement: control of goal-directed action. Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, pp 79–96Google Scholar
  23. James TW, Humphrey GK, Gati JS, Menon RS, Goodale MA (2002) Differential effects of viewpoint on object-driven activation in dorsal and ventral streams. Neuron 35:793–801CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. James TW, Culham J, Humphrey GK, Milner AD, Goodale MA (2003) Ventral occipital lesions impair object recognition but not object-directed grasping: an fMRI study. Brain 126:2463–2475CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Johnson H, Van Beers RJ, Haggard P (2002) Action and awareness in pointing tasks. Exp Brain Res 146:451–459CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Lemay M, Proteau L (2001) A distance effect in a manual aiming task to remembered targets: a test of three hypotheses. Exp Brain Res 140:357–368CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Loftus GR, Masson ME (1994) Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychon Bull Rev 1:476–490CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Maraj A, Heath M (2010) Antipointing: perception-based visual information renders an offline mode of control. Exp Brain Res 202:55–64CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Messier J, Kalaska JF (1999) Comparison of variability of initial kinematics and endpoints of reaching movements. Exp Brain Res 125:139–152CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Neely KA, Heath M, Binsted G (2008) Egocentric and allocentric visual cues influence the specification of movement distance and direction. J Mot Behav 40:203–213CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Pisella L, Gréa H, Tilikete C, Vighetto A, Desmurget M, Rode G, Boisson D, Rossetti Y (2000) An ‘automatic pilot’ for the hand in human posterior parietal cortex: toward reinterpreting optic ataxia. Nat Neurosci 3:729–736CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Prablanc C, Echallier JE, Jeannerod M, Komilis E (1979) Optimal response of eye and hand motor systems in pointing at a visual target. II. Static and dynamic visual cues in the control of hand movement. Biol Cybern 35:183–187CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Rossetti Y, Revol P, McIntosh R, Pisella L, Rode G, Danckert J, Tilikete C, Dijkerman HC, Boisson D, Vighetto A, Michel F, Milner AD (2005) Visually guided reaching: bilateral posterior parietal lesions cause a switch from fast visuomotor to slow cognitive control. Neuropsychologia 43:162–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Rossit S, Malhotra P, Muir K, Reeves I, Duncan G, Harvey M (2011) The role of right temporal lobe structures in off-line action: evidence from lesion-behavior mapping in stroke patients. Cereb Cortex 21:2751–2761CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Schenk T (2006) An allocentric rather than perceptual deficit in patient DF. Nat Neurosci 9:1369–1370CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Schmidt RA, Zelaznik H, Hawkins B, Frank JS, Quinn JT Jr (1979) Motor-output variability: a theory for the accuracy of rapid motor acts. Psychol Rev 86:415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Thaler L, Goodale MA (2011a) The role of online visual feedback for the control of target-directed and allocentric hand movements. J Neurophysiol 105:846–859CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Thaler L, Goodale MA (2011b) Neural substrates of visual spatial coding and visual feedback control for hand movements in allocentric and target-directed tasks. Front Hum Neurosci 5:92CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Thaler L, Goodale MA (2011c) Reaction times for allocentric movements are 35 ms slower than reaction times for target-directed movements. Exp Brain Res 211:313–328CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. van Donkelaar P, Lee RG, Gellman RS (1994) The contribution of retinal and extraretinal signals to manual tracking movements. Exp Brain Res 99:155–163CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Westwood DA, Goodale MA (2003) Perceptual illusion and the real-time control of action. Spat Vis 16:243–254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Kinesiology and Graduate Program in NeuroscienceUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada

Personalised recommendations