Literature DB >> 15151897

Programming time as a function of number of movement parts and changes in movement direction.

M G Fischman1.   

Abstract

The question of whether changes seen in simple reaction time (SRT) as a function of response complexity (i.e., number of movement parts) should be considered as differences in the time needed to centrally program a motor response was addressed. Using a large-scale tapping response, 14 subjects contacted from one to five targets positioned in a straight line, while a second group of 14 subjects executed 90 degrees changes in direction in striking the targets. Results revealed that mean SRT and mean premotor time increased linearly as the number of movement parts increased, regardless of whether changes in movement direction had to be programmed, with the greatest increase occurring between one-, and two-part responses. Increases in motor time were not sufficient to account for the sizeable SRT effect. These findings support the position of increased central programming time for more complex responses, and also help establish some of the boundaries of the complexity effect.

Year:  1984        PMID: 15151897     DOI: 10.1080/00222895.1984.10735329

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mot Behav        ISSN: 0022-2895            Impact factor:   1.328


  12 in total

1.  Planning short pointing sequences.

Authors:  Philippe Vindras; Paolo Viviani
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-07-17       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  The effects of changing movement velocity and complexity on response preparation: evidence from latency, kinematic, and EMG measures.

Authors:  P van Donkelaar; I M Franks
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Fatigue-induced adaptive changes of anticipatory postural adjustments.

Authors:  Adam J Strang; William P Berg
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-10-13       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  The effect of distance on reaction time in aiming movements.

Authors:  Heather Munro; Mandy S Plumb; Andrew D Wilson; Justin H G Williams; Mark Mon-Williams
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-07-17       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Pause time alters the preparation of two-component movements.

Authors:  Michael C Bajema; Colum D MacKinnon; Michael J Carter; Michael Kennefick; Sam Perlmutter; Anthony N Carlsen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-08-14       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Programming time in serial tapping responses as a function of pathway constraint.

Authors:  B Sidaway; B Schoenfelder-Zohdi; B Moore
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  1990

7.  Simon effects in action sequences.

Authors:  Claudia Braun; Armin Kibele
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Reliability, Validity and Usefulness of a New Response Time Test for Agility-Based Sports: A Simple vs. Complex Motor Task.

Authors:  Haris Pojskic; Jeffrey Pagaduan; Edin Uzicanin; Vlatko Separovic; Miodrag Spasic; Nikola Foretic; Damir Sekulic
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 2.988

9.  Neuromuscular responses of elderly women to tasks of increasing complexity imposed during walking.

Authors:  E R Lassau-Wray; A W Parker
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol       Date:  1993

10.  Central and peripheral coordination in movement sequences.

Authors:  P Cordo; M Schieppati; L Bevan; L G Carlton; M J Carlton
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  1993
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.