Literature DB >> 19378414

Context influences on the preparation and execution of reaching movements.

Giovanni Mirabella1, Pierpaolo Pani, Stefano Ferraina.   

Abstract

The ability of rapidly adapting our motor behaviour in order to face the unpredictable changes in the surrounding environment is fundamental for survival. To achieve such a high level of efficiency our motor system has to assess continuously the context in which it acts, gathering all available information that can be relevant for planning goal-oriented movements. One still-debated aspect of movement organization is the nature and timing of motor planning. While motor plans are often taken to be concerned with the setting of kinematic parameters as a function of perceptual and motor factors, it has been suggested that higher level, cognitive factors may also affect planning. To explore this issue further, we asked 18 right-handed human participants to perform speeded hand-reaching movement toward a visual target in two different experimental settings, a reaction time (RT) paradigm (go-only task) and a countermanding paradigm. In both tasks participants executed the same movements, but in the countermanding task no-stop trials were randomly intermixed with stop trials. In stop trials participants were required to withhold the ongoing movement whenever a stop signal was shown. It is known that the presence of stop trials induces a consistent increase of the RTs of no-stop trials with respect to the RTs of go-only trials. However, nothing is known about a similar effect for movement times (MTs). We found that RTs and MTs exhibit opposing tendencies, so that a decrease in the RT correspond to an increase in the MT and vice versa. This tendency was present in all our participants and significant in 90% of them. Furthermore we found a moderate, but again very consistent, anticorrelation between RTs and MTs on a trial-by-trial base. These findings are consistent with strategic changes in movement programmes for the very same movements under different cognitive contexts, requiring different degrees of feedback-driven control during movement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19378414     DOI: 10.1080/02643290802003216

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Neuropsychol        ISSN: 0264-3294            Impact factor:   2.468


  32 in total

1.  A common control signal and a ballistic stage can explain the control of coordinated eye-hand movements.

Authors:  Atul Gopal; Aditya Murthy
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  The presence of visual gap affects the duration of stopping process.

Authors:  Giovanni Mirabella; Pierpaolo Pani; Stefano Ferraina
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-09-17       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Visual salience of the stop-signal affects movement suppression process.

Authors:  Roberto Montanari; Margherita Giamundo; Emiliano Brunamonti; Stefano Ferraina; Pierpaolo Pani
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 4.  Interfacing to the brain's motor decisions.

Authors:  Giovanni Mirabella; Mikhail А Lebedev
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-12-21       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Dual-task practice enhances motor learning: a preliminary investigation.

Authors:  Hui-Ting Goh; Katherine J Sullivan; James Gordon; Gabriele Wulf; Carolee J Winstein
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-08-12       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Proactive control of sequential saccades in the human supplementary eye field.

Authors:  K M Sharika; Sebastiaan F W Neggers; Tjerk P Gutteling; Stefan Van der Stigchel; H Chris Dijkerman; Aditya Murthy
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-03-14       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Effects of probability bias in response readiness and response inhibition on reaching movements.

Authors:  Paolo Federico; Giovanni Mirabella
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-01-31       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  A proactive task set influences how response inhibition is implemented in the basal ganglia.

Authors:  Inge Leunissen; James P Coxon; Stephan P Swinnen
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2016-08-04       Impact factor: 5.038

9.  Is motor inhibition involved in the processing of sentential negation? An assessment via the Stop-Signal Task.

Authors:  Martina Montalti; Marta Calbi; Valentina Cuccio; Maria Alessandra Umiltà; Vittorio Gallese
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2021-04-27

10.  Developmental Coordination Disorder Affects the Processing of Action-Related Verbs.

Authors:  Giovanni Mirabella; Sara Del Signore; Daniel Lakens; Roberto Averna; Roberta Penge; Flavia Capozzi
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.