Bimanual cross-talk during reaching movements is primarily related to response selection, not the specification of motor parameters

被引:56
作者
Hazeltine, E
Diedrichsen, J
Kennerley, SW
Ivry, RB
机构
[1] NASA, Ames Res Ctr, Moffett Field, CA 94035 USA
[2] Univ Calif Berkeley, Dept Psychol, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
来源
PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH-PSYCHOLOGISCHE FORSCHUNG | 2003年 / 67卷 / 01期
关键词
D O I
10.1007/s00426-002-0119-0
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Simultaneous reaching movements made with the two hands can show a considerable increase in reaction time (RT) when they differ in terms of direction or extent, compared to when the movements involve the same direction and extent. This cost has been attributed to cross-talk in the specification of the motor parameters for the two hands. However, a recent study [Diedrich-sen, Hazeltine, Kennerley, & Ivry, (2001). Psychological Science, 12, 493-498] indicates that when reaching movements are cued by the onset of the target endpoint, no compatibility effects are observed. To determine why directly cued movements are immune from interference, we varied the stimulus onset asynchrony for the two movements and used different combinations of directly cued and symbolically cued movements. In two experiments, compatibility effects were only observed when both movements were symbolically cued. No difference was found between compatible and incompatible movements when both movements were directly cued or when one was directly cued and the other was symbolically cued. These results indicate that interference is not related to the specification of movement parameters but instead emerges from processes associated with response selection. Moreover, the data suggest that cross-talk, when present, primarily shortens the RT of the second movement on compatible trials rather than lengthening this RT on incompatible trials.
引用
收藏
页码:56 / 70
页数:15
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]  
ALLPORT A, 1994, ATTENTION PERFORM, V15, P421
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2001, BEHAV BRAIN SCI
[3]   Do action systems resist visual illusions? [J].
Carey, DP .
TRENDS IN COGNITIVE SCIENCES, 2001, 5 (03) :109-113
[4]   CONDITIONAL AND UNCONDITIONAL AUTOMATICITY - A DUAL-PROCESS MODEL OF EFFECTS OF SPATIAL STIMULUS - RESPONSE CORRESPONDENCE [J].
DEJONG, R ;
LIANG, CC ;
LAUBER, E .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 1994, 20 (04) :731-750
[5]   MULTIPLE BOTTLENECKS IN OVERLAPPING TASK-PERFORMANCE [J].
DEJONG, R .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 1993, 19 (05) :965-980
[6]   Moving to directly cued locations abolishes spatial interference during bimanual actions [J].
Diedrichsen, J ;
Hazeltine, E ;
Kennerley, S ;
Ivry, RB .
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2001, 12 (06) :493-498
[7]  
DIEDRICHSEN J, IN PRESS J EXPT PSYC
[8]   Effect anticipation and action control [J].
Elsner, B ;
Hommel, B .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 2001, 27 (01) :229-240
[9]   Dissociation of spatial and temporal coupling in the bimanual movements of callosotomy patients [J].
Franz, EA ;
Eliassen, JC ;
Ivry, RB ;
Gazzaniga, MS .
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 1996, 7 (05) :306-310
[10]   Spatial conceptual influences on the coordination of bimanual actions: When a dual task becomes a single task [J].
Franz, EA ;
Zelaznik, HN ;
Swinnen, S ;
Walter, C .
JOURNAL OF MOTOR BEHAVIOR, 2001, 33 (01) :103-112