Literature DB >> 28567604

Preparation of timing structure involves two independent sub-processes.

Dana Maslovat1, Romeo Chua2, Stuart T Klapp3, Ian M Franks2.   

Abstract

The current study examined the processes involved in the preparation of sequencing and timing initiation for multi-component responses. In two experiments, participants performed a reaction time (RT) task involving a three key-press sequence with either a simple (isochronous) or complex (non-isochronous) timing structure. Conditions involved a precue that provided information about all features of the movement (simple RT), no features of the movement (choice RT), sequencing only, or timing structure only. When sequencing was precued, RT decreased significantly as compared to choice RT, indicative of advance preparation of sequencing. When timing was precued, RT decreased significantly compared to choice RT when the timing structure was simple, suggesting that some aspect of timing preparation can occur prior to the go stimulus. However, even when the timing structure was known in advance, RT was still affected by timing complexity, confirming that some aspect of timing preparation cannot occur until after the onset of the stimulus and thus occurs during the RT interval. To explain these findings, we propose a two-component model of preparation for the timing initiation structure in which timing selection occurs in advance but timing implementation must occur following the go signal. These results support and extend previous findings regarding the independence of the processes associated with response sequencing and timing initiation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28567604     DOI: 10.1007/s00426-017-0877-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Res        ISSN: 0340-0727


  24 in total

1.  Long-term motor programming improvements occur via concatenation of movement sequences during random but not during blocked practice.

Authors:  David L Wright; Charles B Black; Maarten A Immink; Sebastian Brueckner; Curt Magnuson
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 1.328

2.  Changes in the incidental context impacts search but not loading of the motor buffer.

Authors:  Curt E Magnuson; David L Wright; Willem B Verwey
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  2004-07

3.  Are temporal response features prepared in fixed order? Inferences from movement-related potentials.

Authors:  Hartmut Leuthold; Ines Jentzsch
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 4.016

4.  Partial advance information and response preparation: inferences from the lateralized readiness potential.

Authors:  H Leuthold; W Sommer; R Ulrich
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1996-09

Review 5.  Gestalt principles in the control of motor action.

Authors:  Stuart T Klapp; Richard J Jagacinski
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 17.737

6.  A cognitive framework for explaining serial processing and sequence execution strategies.

Authors:  Willem B Verwey; Charles H Shea; David L Wright
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-02

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

Authors:  Dana Maslovat; Stuart T Klapp; Richard J Jagacinski; Ian M Franks
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2014-07-28       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 8.  Preparation for voluntary movement in healthy and clinical populations: evidence from startle.

Authors:  Anthony N Carlsen; Dana Maslovat; Ian M Franks
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-10-26       Impact factor: 3.708

9.  Human movement initiation: specification of arm, direction, and extent.

Authors:  D A Rosenbaum
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1980-12

10.  Are movements prepared in parts? Not under compatible (naturalized) conditions.

Authors:  D Goodman; J A Kelso
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1980-12
View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  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

Review 2.  Central nervous system physiology.

Authors:  John Rothwell; Andrea Antal; David Burke; Antony Carlsen; Dejan Georgiev; Marjan Jahanshahi; Dagmar Sternad; Josep Valls-Solé; Ulf Ziemann
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2021-10-14       Impact factor: 3.708

3.  An adaptive paradigm for detecting the individual duration of the preparatory period in the choice reaction time task.

Authors:  Gurgen Soghoyan; Vladislav Aksiotis; Anna Rusinova; Andriy Myachykov; Alexey Tumyalis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-09-09       Impact factor: 3.752

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.