Literature DB >> 2340872

Trajectory control in targeted force impulses. VII. Independent setting of amplitude and direction in response preparation.

M Favilla1, J Gordon, W Hening, C Ghez.   

Abstract

We have previously shown that when aiming impulses of force to unpredictable flexion and extension targets, subjects prepare themselves to respond by preselecting a default amplitude and direction. In our preceding study, where flexion and extension target ranges were symmetrical, subjects prepared a single default amplitude near the center of each of the two ranges and selected a default direction arbitrarily (Favilla, Hening et al. 1989). Following target presentation, amplitude and direction were specified gradually and in parallel. By using an experimental paradigm in which target amplitudes had unequal probabilities in only one of the two directions, we no sought to determine to what extent the default amplitude prepared by subjects is dependent on the default direction that is selected for a given trial. Five normal subjects produced isometric elbow flexion and extension force impulses to match four targets requiring responses of two amplitudes in each direction. Flexion and extension targets were of the same size. In all biased probability conditions, targets were presented in unpredictable order and, in one direction, the probability of occurrence of the targets was biased (80% versus 20%). In the other direction, the two targets were equiprobable. To maximize the effect of the default settings on response parameters, we required subjects to initiate their response in synchrony with a predictable tone occuring less than a reaction time subsequent to the presentation of the visual target. Such a short interval was chosen to disclose the default parameters selected by limiting the influence of the target just presented on the amplitude and direction of the subjects' responses.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2340872     DOI: 10.1007/bf00229322

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


  7 in total

1.  Trajectory control in targeted force impulses. VI. Independent specification of response amplitude and direction.

Authors:  M Favilla; W Hening; C Ghez
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Trajectory control in targeted force impulses. IV. Influences of choice, prior experience and urgency.

Authors:  W Hening; D Vicario; C Ghez
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Trajectory control in targeted force impulses. V. Gradual specification of response amplitude.

Authors:  W Hening; M Favilla; C Ghez
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Sensitivity of smooth eye movement to small differences in target velocity.

Authors:  E Kowler; S P McKee
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Trajectory control in targeted force impulses. I. Role of opposing muscles.

Authors:  C Ghez; J Gordon
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Trajectory control in targeted force impulses. II. Pulse height control.

Authors:  J Gordon; C Ghez
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  The effect of expectations on slow oculomotor control--IV. Anticipatory smooth eye movements depend on prior target motions.

Authors:  E Kowler; A J Martins; M Pavel
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 1.886

  7 in total
  15 in total

1.  Motor control prior to movement onset: preparatory mechanisms for pointing at visual targets.

Authors:  O Bock; K Arnold
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Default motor preparation under conditions of response uncertainty.

Authors:  Christopher J Forgaard; Dana Maslovat; Anthony N Carlsen; Ian M Franks
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-10-14       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Visual feedback reduces bimanual coupling of movement amplitudes, but not of directions.

Authors:  Simone Cardoso de Oliveira; Sébastien Barthélémy
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-11-03       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Allocentric cues do not always improve whole body reaching performance.

Authors:  Jan M Hondzinski; Yongqin Cui
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-03-25       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Pointing control using a moving base of support.

Authors:  Jan M Hondzinski; Taegyong Kwon
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-06-21       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Nondigital afferent input in reactive control of fingertip forces during precision grip.

Authors:  C Häger-Ross; R S Johansson
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Deficits in inhibitory force control in young adults with ADHD.

Authors:  Kristina A Neely; Peiyuan Wang; Amanda P Chennavasin; Shaadee Samimy; Jacqueline Tucker; Andrea Merida; Koraly Perez-Edgar; Cynthia Huang-Pollock
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 3.139

8.  Accuracy of planar reaching movements. II. Systematic extent errors resulting from inertial anisotropy.

Authors:  J Gordon; M F Ghilardi; S E Cooper; C Ghez
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Accuracy of planar reaching movements. I. Independence of direction and extent variability.

Authors:  J Gordon; M F Ghilardi; C Ghez
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Grip-force responses to unanticipated object loading: load direction reveals body- and gravity-referenced intrinsic task variables.

Authors:  C Häger-Ross; K J Cole; R S Johansson
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.