Skip to main content
Log in

Bimanual coordination affects motor task switching

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Experimental Brain Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Task-switching paradigms have generally been used to investigate cognitive processes involved in decision making or allocating attention. This work extended the task-switching paradigm into the motor domain in order to investigate the consequences of an unexpected environmental perturbation on reaction time and movement time. Typically, task-switching paradigms have investigated consequences of rearranging task sets from one trial to the next; this work explored rearranging planned movements within the context of a single trial. Of particular interest was how the motor system reorganizes coordination patterns when reaching amplitude congruency is manipulated between the two hands. Results for Experiment 1 and the far distance in Experiment 2 indicated that reaction time switch costs were the smallest during congruent task-switch trials, where reaching amplitudes between the two hands were the same. This implies that a planned movement parameter for one hand is accessible for the other hand in the circumstance of an unexpected task switch. However, the reversed congruency effects found for the near distance in Experiment 2 suggest that the ability to capitalize on stored parameter information to decrease reaction time is dependent on environmental factors and task instructions. Movement time results showed that even if a movement with one hand is aborted in mid-execution, it can still influence the performance of the other hand during a task switch. This suggests that bimanual coordination can affect prehensile performance even though only one hand has a goal to achieve.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bingham GP, Hughes K, Mon-Williams M (2008) The coordination patterns observed when two hands reach-to-grasp separate objects. Exp Brain Res 184:283–293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Broadbent DE, Gregory M (1967) Psychological refractory period and the length of time required to make a decision. P Roy Soc Lond B Bio 168:181–193

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Castiello U, Umilta C (1992) Splitting focal attention. J Exp Psychol Human 18:837–848

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Diedrichsen J, Ivry RB, Hazeltine E, Kennerley S, Cohen A (2003) Bimanual interference associated with the selection of target locations. J Exp Psychol Human 29:64–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diedrichsen J, Nambisan R, Kennerley SW, Ivry RB (2004) Independent on-line control of the two hands during bimanual reaching. Eur J Neurosci 19:1643–1652

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dohle C, Ostermann G, Hefter H, Freund H-J (2000) Different coupling for the reach and grasp components in bimanual prehension movements. NeuroReport 11:3787–3791

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gentilucci M, Chieffi S, Scarpa M, Castiello U (1992) Temporal coupling between transport and grasp components during prehension movements: effects of visual perturbation. Behav Brain Res 47:71–82

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert SJ, Shallice T (2002) Task switching: a PDP model. Cogn Psychol 44:297–337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hazeltine E, Diedrichsen J, Kennerley SW, Ivry RB (2003) Bimanual cross-talk during reaching movements is primarily related to response selection, not the specification of motor parameters. Psychol Res 67:56–70

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson GM, Jackson SR, Kritikos A (1999) Attention for action: coordinating bimanual reach-to-grasp movements. Brit J Psychol 90:247–270

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kelso JS, Southard DL, Goodman D (1979) On the coordination of two-handed movements. J Exp Psychol Human 5:229–238

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Koch I (2005) Sequential task predictability in task switching. Psychon B Rev 12:107–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marteniuk RG, MacKenzie CL, Baba DM (1984) Bimanual movement control: information processing and interaction effects. Q J Exp Psychol A 36:335–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason AH (2008) Coordination and control of bimanual prehension: effects of perturbing object location. Exp Brain Res 188:125–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mason AH, Bruyn JL, Lazarus JC (2010) Bimanual coordination in children: manipulation of object size. Exp Brain Res 201:797–807

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Monsell S (2003) Task switching. Trends Cogn Sci 7:134–140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Navon D, Miller J (2002) Queuing or sharing? A critical evaluation of the single-bottleneck notion. Cogn Psychol 44:193–251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paulignan Y, MacKenzie CL, Marteniuk RG, Jeannerod M (1991a) Selective perturbation of visual input during prehension movements. 1. The effects of changing object position. Exp Brain Res 83:502–512

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Paulignan Y, Jeannerod M, MacKenzie CL, Marteniuk RG (1991b) Selective perturbation of visual input during prehension movements. 2. The effects of changing object size. Exp Brain Res 87:407–420

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers RD, Monsell S (1995) Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. J Exp Psychol Gen 124:207–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum DA, Weber RJ, Hazelett WM, Hindorff V (1986) The parameter remapping effect in human performance: evidence from tongue twisters and finger fumblers. J Memory Lang 25:710–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherwood DE (2007) Separate movement planning and spatial assimilation effects in sequential bimanual aiming movements. Percept Motor Skill 105:501–513

    Google Scholar 

  • Sigman M, Dehaene S (2006) Dynamics of the central bottleneck: dual-task and task uncertainty. PLoS Biol 4:1227–1238

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Spijkers W, Heuer H, Kleinsorge T, Van der Loo H (1997) Preparation of bimanual movements with same and different amplitudes: specification interference as revealed by reaction time. Acta Psychol 96:207–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spijkers W, Heuer H, Steglich C, Klenisorge T (2000) Specification of movement amplitudes for the left and right hands: evidence for transient parametric coupling from overlapping-task performance. J Exp Psychol Human 26:1091–1105

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Waszak F, Hommel B, Allport A (2003) Task-switching and long-term priming: role of episodic stimulus-task bindings in task-shift costs. Cogn Psychol 46:361–413

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wenderoth N, Van Dooren M, Vandebroek A, De Vos J, Vangheluwe S, Stinear C, Byblow WD, Swinnen SP (2009) Conceptual binding: Integrated visual cues reduce processing costs in bimanual movements. J Neurophysiol 102:302–311

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Winer BJ, Brown DR, Michels KM (1991) Statistical principles in experimental design, 3rd edn. McGraw Hill, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Wylie G, Allport A (2000) Task switching and the measurement of “switch costs”. Psychol Res 63:212–233

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zanone PG, Kelso JS (1991) Relative timing from the perspective of dynamic pattern theory: stability and instability. In: Fagard J, Wolff PH (eds) The development of timing control and temporal organization in coordinated action: invariant relative timing, rhythms and coordination. North Holland, Oxford, pp 69–92

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea H. Mason.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bernardin, B.J., Mason, A.H. Bimanual coordination affects motor task switching. Exp Brain Res 215, 257–267 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-011-2890-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-011-2890-x

Keywords

Navigation