Literature DB >> 27618816

An optimal velocity for online limb-target regulation processes?

Luc Tremblay1,2,3, Valentin A Crainic4, John de Grosbois4, Arindam Bhattacharjee4, Andrew Kennedy4, Steve Hansen5,6, Timothy N Welsh4,5.   

Abstract

The utilization of visual information for the control of ongoing voluntary limb movements has been investigated for more than a century. Recently, online sensorimotor processes for the control of upper-limb reaches were hypothesized to include a distinct process related to the comparison of limb and target positions (i.e., limb-target regulation processes: Elliott et al. in Psychol Bull 136:1023-1044. doi: 10.1037/a0020958 , 2010). In the current study, this hypothesis was tested by presenting participants with brief windows of vision (20 ms) when the real-time velocity of the reaching limb rose above selected velocity criteria. One experiment tested the perceptual judgments of endpoint bias (i.e., under- vs. over-shoot), and another experiment tested the shifts in endpoint distributions following an imperceptible target jump. Both experiments revealed that limb-target regulation processes take place at an optimal velocity or "sweet spot" between movement onset and peak limb velocity (i.e., 1.0 m/s with the employed movement amplitude and duration). In contrast with pseudo-continuous models of online control (e.g., Elliott et al. in Hum Mov Sci 10:393-418. doi: 10.1016/0167-9457(91)90013-N , 1991), humans likely optimize online limb-target regulation processes by gathering visual information at a rather limited period of time, well in advance of peak limb velocity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Online control; Perception; Reaching; Target jump; Vision

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27618816     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-016-4770-x

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


  20 in total

1.  Learning to optimize speed, accuracy, and energy expenditure: a framework for understanding speed-accuracy relations in goal-directed aiming.

Authors:  Digby Elliott; Steven Hansen; Jocelyn Mendoza; Luc Tremblay
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 1.328

Review 2.  Optimality principles in sensorimotor control.

Authors:  Emanuel Todorov
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 24.884

3.  Optimizing rapid aiming behaviour: Movement kinematics depend on the cost of corrective modifications.

Authors:  James Lyons; Steve Hansen; Suzanne Hurding; Digby Elliott
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-03-31       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Evidence for continuous processing of visual information in a manual video-aiming task.

Authors:  Luc Proteau; Adel Roujoula; Julie Messier
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 1.328

5.  Online Vision as a Function of Real-Time Limb Velocity: Another Case for Optimal Windows.

Authors:  Andrew Kennedy; Arindam Bhattacharjee; Steve Hansen; Connor Reid; Luc Tremblay
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 1.328

6.  The utility of vision during action: multiple visuomotor processes?

Authors:  Luc Tremblay; Steve Hansen; Andrew Kennedy; Darian T Cheng
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2013-02-26       Impact factor: 1.328

7.  Large adjustments in visually guided reaching do not depend on vision of the hand or perception of target displacement.

Authors:  M A Goodale; D Pelisson; C Prablanc
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1986 Apr 24-30       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Optimality in human motor performance: ideal control of rapid aimed movements.

Authors:  D E Meyer; R A Abrams; S Kornblum; C E Wright; J E Smith
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  Processing visual feedback information for movement control.

Authors:  L G Carlton
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1981-10       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Humans use continuous visual feedback from the hand to control fast reaching movements.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Saunders; David C Knill
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-08-06       Impact factor: 1.972

View more
  2 in total

1.  Distinct and flexible rates of online control.

Authors:  John de Grosbois; Luc Tremblay
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-07-21

2.  Prolonged Feedback Duration Does Not Affect Implicit Recalibration in a Visuomotor Rotation Task.

Authors:  Jana Maresch; Opher Donchin
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2022-04-20
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.