Literature DB >> 25068697

Control of response timing occurs during the simple reaction time interval but on-line for choice reaction time.

Dana Maslovat1, Stuart T Klapp2, Richard J Jagacinski3, Ian M Franks1.   

Abstract

The preparation of multiple element movements has been examined for decades, with no clear explanation offered for the disparate results observed. Results from 2 experiments are presented and, in conjunction with previous results, a theoretical interpretation is offered regarding the preparatory processes that occur before, during and after the reaction time (RT) interval for multiple element movements during both simple and choice RT paradigms. In Experiment 1, number of elements and timing complexity were manipulated in a simple RT key-press task, using a startling acoustic stimulus to probe advance preparation. Both startle and nonstartle RT increased with number of movement elements and for a movement with increased timing complexity, providing evidence that the control of response timing occurs during the RT interval. In Experiment 2, the production of key-press movements of varying number of elements was compared in a simple versus choice RT paradigm. Results indicated that simple RT was affected by the number of elements, yet choice RT was not. Additionally, choice RT trials showed significantly longer interresponse intervals compared with those observed in simple RT trials, providing evidence for online processing in choice RT. The results of both studies, together with previous findings, suggest that planning of the timing of the onsets of the elements is prepared during simple RT, whereas planning of other aspects of the sequence of elements seems to occur in the foreperiod prior to the "go" signal. Conversely, in the choice RT paradigm, timing seems to be controlled online. This explanation may bring closure on difficulties encountered in over 50 years of research examining response preparation for complex movements.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25068697     DOI: 10.1037/a0037522

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  10 in total

1.  Preparation of timing structure involves two independent sub-processes.

Authors:  Dana Maslovat; Romeo Chua; Stuart T Klapp; Ian M Franks
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-05-31

Review 2.  The bottleneck of the psychological refractory period effect involves timing of response initiation rather than response selection.

Authors:  Stuart T Klapp; Dana Maslovat; Richard J Jagacinski
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2019-02

3.  Simon effects in action sequences.

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

4.  Investigation of timing preparation during response initiation and execution using a startling acoustic stimulus.

Authors:  Dana Maslovat; Romeo Chua; Ian M Franks
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-09-10       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Nucleus accumbens and caudate atrophy predicts longer action selection times in young and old adults.

Authors:  Matthieu P Boisgontier; Peter van Ruitenbeek; Inge Leunissen; Sima Chalavi; Stefan Sunaert; Oron Levin; Stephan P Swinnen
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 5.038

6.  Modulation of vestibular-evoked responses prior to simple and complex arm movements.

Authors:  Michael Kennefick; Chris J McNeil; Joel S Burma; Paige V Copeland; Paul van Donkelaar; Brian H Dalton
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Reduced motor preparation during dual-task performance: evidence from startle.

Authors:  Dana Maslovat; Neil M Drummond; Michael J Carter; Anthony N Carlsen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-05-31       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Responses to startling acoustic stimuli indicate that movement-related activation is constant prior to action: a replication with an alternate interpretation.

Authors:  Dana Maslovat; Ian M Franks; Alexandra Leguerrier; Anthony N Carlsen
Journal:  Physiol Rep       Date:  2015-02-06

9.  Response triggering by an acoustic stimulus increases with stimulus intensity and is best predicted by startle reflex activation.

Authors:  Dana Maslovat; Christin M Sadler; Victoria Smith; Allison Bui; Anthony N Carlsen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  StartReact effects in first dorsal interosseous muscle are absent in a pinch task, but present when combined with elbow flexion.

Authors:  Juan M Castellote; Markus Kofler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.