Current status of the motor program: Revisited

Summers, Jeffery J.; Anson, J. Greg

doi:10.1016/j.humov.2009.01.002

Cited by 89 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many authors consider ''planning'' to be a major stage among the processes that link perception to action (Andersen & Cui, 2009;Churchland & Shenoy, 2007;Crammond & Kalaska, 2000;Herbort & Butz, 2010;Hoshi & Tanji, 2007;Leuthold, Sommer, & Ulrich, 2004;Requin, Brener, & Ring, 1991;Riehle, 2005;Rosenbaum, 1980;Rosenbaum, Cohen, Jax, Weiss, & van der Wel, 2007;Summers & Anson, 2009;Wise, 1985). The term ''planning'' often refers, more or less explicitly, to the concept of motor program (Ghez et al, 1997;Le´pine, Glencross, & Requin, 1989;Leuthold & Jentzsch, 2009;Prabhu et al, 2007;Requin et al, 1991;Riehle & Requin, 1989;Rosenbaum, 1980;Rosenbaum et al, 2007;Summers & Anson, 2009;Wise, 1985). According to this concept, kinematics (e.g., direction, extent, and velocity) and kinetics (e.g., muscle activity, forces, and joint torques) parameters are specified before movement execution to form a program (or plan).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning of visually guided reach‐to‐grasp movements: Inference from reaction time and contingent negative variation (CNV)

Zaepffel

Brochier

2011

Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We performed electroencephalogram (EEG) recording in a precuing task to investigate the planning processes of reach‐to‐grasp movements in human. In this reaction time (RT) task, subjects had to reach, grasp, and pull an object as fast as possible after a visual GO signal. We manipulated two parameters: the hand shape for grasping (precision grip or side grip) and the force required to pull the object (high or low). Three seconds before the GO onset, a cue provided advance information about force, grip, both parameters, or no information at all. EEG data show that reach‐to‐grasp movements generate differences in the topographic distribution of the late Contingent Negative Variation (ICNV) amplitude between the 4 precuing conditions. Along with RT data, it confirms that two distinct functional networks are involved with different time courses in the planning of grip and force. Finally, we outline the composite nature of the lCNV that might reflect both high‐ and low‐level planning processes.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning of visually guided reach‐to‐grasp movements: Inference from reaction time and contingent negative variation (CNV)

Zaepffel

Brochier

2011

Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study rely its intervention model in the extensive known, considering three stages motor relearning process that consists on the sequential cognitive, associative and autonomous phases (Fitts and Posner, 1967). The duration of the first phase is limited from a few minutes to a few days, while the second learning phase can last for weeks or even months (Schmidt, 2003;Sherwood and Lee, 2003;Summers and Anson, 2009) . According to this model for patients to improve their motor performance the exercise intervention must go through scapula-focused exercises aiming the awareness of the scapulothoracic neutral zone and normalisation of the scapulohumeral rhythm, by facilitating the central nervous system's ability to efficiently control the inter-segmental motion of the upper limb (Hess, 2000;Cools et al, 2003;Cowan et al, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The latter become particularly relevant to the associative phase where the quality of the movement becomes more important than the amount of practice itself (Schmidt, 2003;Sherwood and Lee, 2003;Summers and Anson, 2009). The results also provide preliminary evidence that after one physiotherapy session, immediate transfer of learning (Issurin, 2013;Maslovat et al, 2009) occurs when performing a similar task, with an increase in the execution quality.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Three-Dimensional Kinematic Biofeedback on the Performance of Scapula-focused Exercises

Antunes¹,

Filipe²,

Cordeiro³

et al. 2014

Proceedings of the International Conference on Physiological Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Three-dimensional (3D) kinematic biofeedback can help identify scapular movement disorders and assist the subjects' motor relearning process by facilitating changes in physiological and biomechanical function through real-time knowledge of performance and result during or immediately after a task execution. This study assessed the effectiveness of 3D kinematic biofeedback on the quality of the scapula-focused exercises execution, and motor learning transfer during shoulder flexion and a daily activity. Thirty healthy adults with no history of shoulder pain or dysfunction were randomly distributed into two groups. Skinmounted sensors allowed tracking of the thorax, scapula and humerus, and scapulothoracic and glenohumeral 3D angles were computed after reconstructing upper-extremity motions during daily activities and exercises for different phases of a motor relearning process. The results of this study demonstrate that the execution quality of scapula-focused exercises benefits of real-time 3D kinematic biofeedback and that transfer of learning occurs with a specific motor training intervention.

show abstract

“…In broad terms, there are three approaches to addressing this control problem. The first is to assume that management of action involves a set of specifications which define which muscles are activated, by how much etc., e.g., in the form of an action schema (Norman & Shallice, 1986;Schmidt, 2003) or generalised motor program (Summers & Anson, 2009). This approach ties in with much of the recent neuroimaging work on tool-use, in which specific regions of the brain (notably left medial fusiform gyrus, left intraparietal sulcus, and left ventral premotor cortex) seem to be active when naming tools, observing tool-use, or planning movements with tools (Chao & Martin, 2000;Grafton et al, 1997;Higuchi et al, 2007;JohnsonFrey, 2004;Krist, 2012;Martin, 2007).…”

Section: Why Does Human Motor Control Not Need Internal Representations?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Thinking Through Tools: What Can Tool-Use Tell Us About Distributed Cognition?

Baber

2015

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In this paper, I question the notion that tool-use must be driven by an internal representation which specifies the "motor program" enacted in the behaviour of the tool-user. Rather, it makes more sense to define tool-use in terms of characteristics of the dynamics of this behaviour. As the behaviour needs to be adjusted to suit changes in context, so there is unlikely to be a oneto-one, linear mapping between an action and its effect. Thus, tool-use can best be described using concepts from Nonlinear Dynamics. Such an approach can be used to create a sort of cybernetic model of tool-use. However, there is a danger that such a model can either lead us back to internal representations (in that the comparator used to evaluate feedback during behaviour could be assumed to be pre-defined) or could fail to capture cognitive aspects of behaviour. In particular, the question of how the craftworker's intent can be enacted in the use of tools to produce a specific object seems to be lost in the cybernetic account. My solution is two-fold. First, the "model" is created on-the-fly and adapted through moment-by-moment interactions in the system of tool-user-tool-material-environment. This means that, rather than assuming a pre-defined internal representation that drives behaviour, I propose that cognition involves the selection of salient parameters that characterize the behaviour and the continued monitoring and management of behaviour in terms of these parameters. Second, intent is only loosely defined a priori but crystallizes through the continued interactions between craftworker and object through a process in which the affordances of the object become apparent to, and responded to by, the craftworker.

show abstract

Current status of the motor program: Revisited

Cited by 89 publications

References 33 publications

Planning of visually guided reach‐to‐grasp movements: Inference from reaction time and contingent negative variation (CNV)

Planning of visually guided reach‐to‐grasp movements: Inference from reaction time and contingent negative variation (CNV)

Effectiveness of Three-Dimensional Kinematic Biofeedback on the Performance of Scapula-focused Exercises

Thinking Through Tools: What Can Tool-Use Tell Us About Distributed Cognition?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About