Literature DB >> 19882148

Visuomotor mental rotation: the reaction time advantage for anti-pointing is not influenced by perceptual experience with the cardinal axes.

Kristina A Neely1, Matthew Heath.   

Abstract

In the visuomotor mental rotation (VMR) paradigm, participants execute a center-out reaching movement to a location that deviates from a visual cue by a predetermined instruction angle. Previous work has demonstrated a linear increase in reaction time (RT) as a function of the amplitude of the instruction angle (Georgopoulos and Massey in Exp Brain Res 65:361-370, 1987). In contrast, we recently reported a RT advantage for an instruction angle of 180 degrees relative to a 90 degrees angle (Neely and Heath in Neurosci Lett 463:194-198, 2009). It is possible, however, that perceptual expertise with the cardinal axes, which are perceptually familiar reference frames, influenced the results of our previous investigation. To address this issue, we employed a VMR paradigm identical to that of our previous work, with the exception that the stimulus array was shifted 45 degrees from the horizontal and vertical meridians. Our results demonstrated that RTs were fastest and least variable when the instruction angle was 0 degrees, followed by 180 degrees, which in turn, was faster than 90 degrees. Such findings establish that the RT advantage for the 180 degrees instruction angle is not influenced by perceptual expertise with the cardinal axes. Moreover, the present results provide convergent evidence that RT is not determined by the angle of rotation; instead, they indicate that response latencies reflect computational differences in the complexity of response remapping.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19882148     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-009-2056-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  28 in total

1.  Why are angles misperceived?

Authors:  S Nundy; B Lotto; D Coppola; A Shimpi; D Purves
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-05-09       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Neural correlates of reaching decisions in dorsal premotor cortex: specification of multiple direction choices and final selection of action.

Authors:  Paul Cisek; John F Kalaska
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2005-03-03       Impact factor: 17.173

3.  The antipointing task: vector inversion is supported by a perceptual estimate of visual space.

Authors:  Matthew Heath; Anika Maraj; Meaghan Maddigan; Gordon Binsted
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.328

4.  Anti-pointing is mediated by a perceptual bias of target location in left and right visual space.

Authors:  Matthew Heath; Anika Maraj; Ashlee Gradkowski; Gordon Binsted
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Egocentric and allocentric visual cues influence the specification of movement distance and direction.

Authors:  Kristina A Neely; Matthew Heath; Gordon Binsted
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 1.328

6.  Eye-hand interactions during goal-directed pointing movements.

Authors:  P van Donkelaar
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  1997-07-07       Impact factor: 1.837

7.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

8.  Contribution of retinal versus extraretinal signals towards visual localization in goal-directed movements.

Authors:  O Bock
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects.

Authors:  R N Shepard; J Metzler
Journal:  Science       Date:  1971-02-19       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Where left becomes right: a magnetoencephalographic study of sensorimotor transformation for antisaccades.

Authors:  So Young Moon; Jason J S Barton; Szymon Mikulski; Frida E Polli; Matthew S Cain; Mark Vangel; Matti S Hämäläinen; Dara S Manoach
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2007-04-27       Impact factor: 6.556

View more
  4 in total

1.  Antipointing: perception-based visual information renders an offline mode of control.

Authors:  Anika Maraj; Matthew Heath
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-12-12       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Eye movement influences on coupled and decoupled eye-hand coordination tasks.

Authors:  Matthew A Yeomans; Brandon Phillips; Marc Dalecki; Jan M Hondzinski
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2021-06-11       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Non-target stimuli in the visual field influence movement preparation in upper-limb reaching.

Authors:  Kristina A Neely; Laura J Morris
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2015-07-26       Impact factor: 3.046

4.  The effect of different imitation models on theaccuracy and speed of imitation of movement.

Authors:  Hitomi Nishizawa; Teiji Kimura; Ah-Cheng Goh
Journal:  J Phys Ther Sci       Date:  2015-11-30
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.