Literature DB >> 25204201

The influence of visual feedback and prior knowledge about feedback on vertical aiming strategies.

Digby Elliott1, Chris Dutoy, Matthew Andrew, James J Burkitt, Lawrence E M Grierson, James L Lyons, Spencer J Hayes, Simon J Bennett.   

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to examine time and energy optimization strategies for movements made with and against gravity. In Experiment 1, the authors manipulated concurrent visual feedback, and knowledge about feedback. When vision was eliminated upon movement initiation, participants exhibited greater undershooting, both with their primary submovement and their final endpoint, than when vision was available. When aiming downward, participants were more likely to terminate their aiming following the primary submovement or complete a lower amplitude corrective submovement. This strategy reduced the frequency of energy-consuming corrections against gravity. In Experiment 2, the authors eliminated vision of the hand and the target at the end of the movement. This procedure was expected to have its greatest impact under no-vision conditions where no visual feedback was available for subsequent planning. As anticipated, direction and concurrent visual feedback had a profound impact on endpoint bias. Participants exhibited pronounced undershooting when aiming downward and without vision. Differences in undershooting between vision and no vision were greater under blocked feedback conditions. When performers were uncertain about the impending feedback, they planned their movements for the worst-case scenario. Thus movement planning considers the variability in execution, and avoids outcomes that require time and energy to correct.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aiming; energy optimization; gravity; movement planning; speed-accuracy; vision

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25204201     DOI: 10.1080/00222895.2014.933767

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mot Behav        ISSN: 0022-2895            Impact factor:   1.328


  7 in total

1.  Different damping responses explain vertical endpoint error differences between visual conditions.

Authors:  Jan M Hondzinski; Chelsea M Soebbing; Allyson E French; Sara A Winges
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  The violation of Fitts' Law: an examination of displacement biases and corrective submovements.

Authors:  James W Roberts; Jarrod Blinch; Digby Elliott; Romeo Chua; James L Lyons; Timothy N Welsh
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-03-15       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  How to point and to interpret pointing gestures? Instructions can reduce pointer-observer misunderstandings.

Authors:  Oliver Herbort; Wilfried Kunde
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-11-10

4.  Delay of gaze fixation during reaching movement with the non-dominant hand to a distant target.

Authors:  Miya K Rand; Shannon D R Ringenbach
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2022-04-02       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  The interaction between practice and performance pressure on the planning and control of fast target directed movement.

Authors:  Jonathan E Allsop; Gavin P Lawrence; Robert Gray; Michael A Khan
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-08-17

6.  Energy minimization within target-directed aiming: the mediating influence of the number of movements and target size.

Authors:  James W Roberts
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2020-02-20       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Assessing visually guided reaching in people with multiple sclerosis with and without self-reported upper limb impairment.

Authors:  Darrin O Wijeyaratnam; Thomas Edwards; Lara A Pilutti; Erin K Cressman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.