Being discrete helps keep to the beat

Abstract

Synchronizing our actions with external events is a task we perform without apparent effort. Its foundation relies on accurate temporal control that is widely accepted to take one of two different modes of implementation: explicit timing for discrete actions and implicit timing for smooth continuous movements. Here we assess synchronisation performance for different types of action and test the degree to which each action supports corrective updating following changes in the environment. Participants performed three different finger actions in time with an auditory pacing stimulus allowing us to assess synchronisation performance. Presenting a single perturbation to the otherwise regular metronome allowed us to examine corrections supported by movements varying in their mode of timing implementation. We find that discrete actions are less variable and support faster error correction. As such, discrete actions may be preferred when engaging in time-critical adaptive behaviour with people and objects in a dynamic environment.

Sensorimotor synchronization: A review of recent research (2006–2012)

“…A strong negative correlation was observed between the degree of this asymmetry and the SD asy , indicating more stable synchronization when the movement was less sinusoidal. Elliott, Welchman, and Wing (2009a) compared three forms of finger action in synchrony with an auditory metronome: standard tapping, isometric force pulses applied to a sensor while maintaining contact with it, and smooth quasisinusoidal pressure variation applied to the sensor. Phase correction in response to an unpredictable phase shift was significantly slower in the smooth movement than in the two more discrete movements, and SD asy was also greater.…”

Auditory rhythmic cueing in movement rehabilitation: findings and possible mechanisms

“…This suggests that more cerebral resources are needed for discrete movements and that rhythmic movements are not simply concatenated discrete actions. Synchronizing to auditory cues, also termed sensorimotor synchronization (SMS), can alter the trajectory of a movement [27], but more so for discrete than for rhythmic movements [28], implying that the potential impact of a cue may depend on the type of movement. Additionally, interpersonal differences in SMS abilities are reported [29,30], and SMS difficulty also depends on the type of entrainment, where phase entrainment denotes synchronizing movement to specific beats, and period entrainment refers to SMS without alignment to the start of the pattern.…”

Audiotactile interactions in temporal perception

“…Although the reason behind this effect is not yet completely clear, the explanation that currently has the most support claims that this error could be attributed to differences in the nerve conduction time between click and tap and their corresponding central representations (Paillard-Fraisse hypothesis; Fraisse, 1980; see also Aschersleben, 2002, for a coverage of the explanatory models of this effect). Whereas the majority of studies have investigated synchronization to unimodal (typically auditory) stimulus sequences (e.g., Elliott, Welchman, & Wing, 2009;Hary & Moore, 1987;Rivenez, Drake, Brochard, & Guillaume, 2008), a recent study attempted to assess synchronization to multisensory cues (Elliott, Wing, & Welchman, 2010). Participants tapped in time with auditory, visual, and tactile metronomic signals, under conditions of either unimodal or bimodal stimulus presentation.…”