Literature DB >> 23727830

Influence of mechanical load on sequential effects.

Christoph Schütz1, Thomas Schack.   

Abstract

Almost two decades ago, sequential effects of human grasping behaviour were described for the first time: In a sequential task, participants persisted in using the previous grasp type. According to the plan-modification hypothesis, such sequential effects reduce the movement planning costs and occur within a limited range of indifference. In the current study, we asked whether the anticipated mechanical costs of a movement would compete with the movement planning costs and, thus, reduce the magnitude of the sequential effect. To this end, participants were tested in a sequential, perceptual-motor task (opening a column of drawers), which offered a continuous range of posture solutions for each trial. In a pre-/post-test design, the magnitude of the sequential effect was measured before and after a manipulation phase with increased mechanical costs. Participants displayed a sequential effect for the majority of drawers in the pre-test, which was significantly reduced in the post-test. This finding indicates that each executed movement is a weighted function of both its cognitive and mechanical costs. The result also implies that sequential effects do not result solely from dynamical properties of the motor system, but instead reflect computational features of the movement selection process.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23727830     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-013-3576-3

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


  27 in total

1.  An investigation into manual asymmetries in grasp behavior and kinematics during an object manipulation task.

Authors:  Christian Seegelke; Charmayne M L Hughes; Thomas Schack
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-09-22       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  End-state comfort in bimanual object manipulation.

Authors:  Matthias Weigelt; Wilfried Kunde; Wolfgang Prinz
Journal:  Exp Psychol       Date:  2006

3.  Hand path priming in manual obstacle avoidance: evidence that the dorsal stream does not only control visually guided actions in real time.

Authors:  Steven A Jax; David A Rosenbaum
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Developing motor planning over ages.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Thibaut; Lucette Toussaint
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  2009-11-17

5.  Use-dependent and error-based learning of motor behaviors.

Authors:  Jörn Diedrichsen; Olivier White; Darren Newman; Níall Lally
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-04-14       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Limb-segment selection in drawing behaviour.

Authors:  R G Meulenbroek; D A Rosenbaum; A J Thomassen; L R Schomaker
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  1993-05

7.  Motor control strategies in a continuous task space.

Authors:  Christoph Schütz; Matthias Weigelt; Dennis Odekerken; Timo Klein-Soetebier; Thomas Schack
Journal:  Motor Control       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 1.422

8.  Hand path priming in manual obstacle avoidance: evidence for abstract spatiotemporal forms in human motor control.

Authors:  Robrecht P R D van der Wel; Robin M Fleckenstein; Steven A Jax; David A Rosenbaum
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Monkey see, monkey plan, monkey do: the end-state comfort effect in cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus).

Authors:  Daniel J Weiss; Jason D Wark; David A Rosenbaum
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2007-12

10.  Bimanual grasp planning reflects changing rather than fixed constraint dominance.

Authors:  Robrecht P R D van der Wel; David A Rosenbaum
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-07-24       Impact factor: 1.972

View more
  9 in total

1.  Hemispheric lateralization does not affect the cognitive and mechanical cost of a sequential motor task.

Authors:  Christoph Schütz; Thomas Schack
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Decisions in motion: passive body acceleration modulates hand choice.

Authors:  Romy S Bakker; Roel H A Weijer; Robert J van Beers; Luc P J Selen; W Pieter Medendorp
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Motor hysteresis in a sequential grasping and pointing task is absent in task-critical joints.

Authors:  Christoph Schütz; Matthias Weigelt; Thomas Schack
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Cognitive costs of motor planning do not differ between pointing and grasping in a sequential task.

Authors:  Christoph Schütz; Matthias Weigelt; Thomas Schack
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-03-10       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Frames of reference in action plan recall: influence of hand and handedness.

Authors:  Christian Seegelke; Charmayne M L Hughes; Kathrin Wunsch; Robrecht van der Wel; Matthias Weigelt
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-06-13       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Observing end-state comfort favorable actions does not modulate action plan recall.

Authors:  Christian Seegelke
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-01-29

7.  Repetition effects in action planning reflect effector- but not hemisphere-specific coding.

Authors:  Christian Seegelke; Carolin Schonard; Tobias Heed
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2021-11-17       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Movement plans for posture selection do not transfer across hands.

Authors:  Christoph Schütz; Thomas Schack
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-09-11

9.  Shifts of the point-of-change can be attributed to a lower mechanical cost of motor execution.

Authors:  Christoph Schütz; Thomas Schack
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2020-03-26       Impact factor: 1.972

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.