Slow potential correlates of preparatory set

Loveless, N.E.; Sanford, Anthony J.

doi:10.1016/0301-0511(74)90005-2

Cited by 301 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore the E wave seems to be mainly related to motor preparation. This view is supported by experimental evidence (reviewed by Loveless and Sanford, 1974;1975) that the E wave is affected by variables, such as foreperiod duration, time uncertainty, incentives and 'speed/accuracy' instructions, which are known to influence motor preparation, as indicated by RT. For example, Loveless and Sanford (1974) found that both the E wave and the RT were strongly affected by ínstructions governing the speediaccuracy of response to 32, whereas the O wave remained unaffected.…”

Section: 7 Conclustonmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…To avoid possible changes in general activation between the expectancy conditions, the S¡probability indicated by S¡ was varied from tri:,1-to-trial. Motor preparation was varied by instructions goveming speed-accuracy trade-off (see Loveless & Sanford, 1974) and by comparing these conditions with a condition in which the subject had to delay his reaction. Although there is still some uncertainty as to whether stimulus processing is also involved, recent theories (Ollman, in press;Pachella, 1974) assume that speedaccuracy mainly influences the level of motor preparation or, at least, the willingness of the subject to react.…”

Section: \ Prscpssronmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Slow brain potentials preceding task performance

Gaillard

1985

Biological Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: 7 Conclustonmentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: \ Prscpssronmentioning

confidence: 99%

Slow brain potentials preceding task performance

Gaillard

1985

Biological Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Because clear indications of motor preparation have been found in studies on the contingent negative variation (CNV) using an lSI of longer duration than the classic 1 sec (Gaillard, 1978;Loveless, 1977;Loveless & Sanford, 1974;Rohrbaugh, Syndulko, & Lindsley, 1976), it was decided to study reflex amplitude changes during an lSI of 4 sec. Comparable experiments, using the same interval and foot responses, were run to study motor preparation on the cortical level by CNV techniques (Brunia, 1980).…”

Section: Tilburg University Tilburg the Netherlandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spinal reflexes as indicator of motor preparation in man

Brunia

Vuister

1979

Psychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the fixed foreperiod (4 sec) of two reaction time experiments, using 80 subjects, Hoffman reflexes were simultaneously evoked in both legs in a pseudorandom order at 13 different measuring points. The purpose of the study was to investigate the time course of amplitude changes in both legs, in muscles both involved and not involved in the response. In Experiment I, subjects responded after the imperative signal by a plantar flexion of either the right or left foot. Thus, reflexes were evoked via the motoneuron pool relevant for the response and via the contralateral irrelevant pool. In Experiment 2, subjects pressed a button with either the right or the left index finger. Thus, reflexes were evoked via motoneurons, irrelevant for the response. Reflex amplitudes during the foreperiod were larger than during the intertrial interval (ITI). An early increase was found at 100-200 msec after the warning signal. Thereafter, amplitudes decreased but remained larger than during the IT!. After 1,000 msec, a steady increase was found, with the largest amplitudes near the end of the foreperiod. Amplitude changes were not different for relevant and irrelevant muscles. It was concluded that the second increase might be part of a motor preparation process.Preparation for a movement can be investigated in reaction time experiments with a fixed interstimulus interval (lSI) between a warning stimulus (WS) and the response stimulus (RS). The use of WS causes a shortening of the mean reaction time (RT). The improved performance implies an earlier discharge of the motoneurons that innervate the muscles used in responding.The excitability of these motoneurons can be estimated by means of monosynaptic reflexes evoked via the same motoneuron pool before the movement is made (Gerilowsky & Tsekov, 1975; Requin, 1969). In general, changes in amplitude indicate changes in the output of the motoneuron pool, and consequently they are an index of fluctuations in (1) motoneuron excitability and (2) presynaptic inhibition of the la fibers, which conduct the afferent volley to the motoneuron pool (Figure 1). Evoking reflexes during an lSI provides the opportunity to study specific and nonspecific changes in the excitability of the motoneurons. Changes are specific when they are present exclusively in the muscle that is to respond. They are nonspecific when both involved and noninvolved muscles show the same reaction pattern. It is obvious that at a certain moment between stimulus and response, the specific activation has to be This work is part of a program suppor ted by the Dutch Organisation for the Advancement of Basic Research ZWO (Grant 58-44), the Dutch Health Organisation TNO (CLEO) , and the Esther Evrard Fund. The computer program for the LAB 8E was developed by Hans Adriaanse and Henk van Nieuwstadt. Lied Damman assisted in the experiments, which were carried out in the Dr. Hans Berger Clinic at Breda. Han Brunia and Loes Verhallen assisted in the data analysis.

show abstract

“…Rohrbaugh & Gaillard, 1983!. The early CNV wave seems to reflect the orienting properties of the warning signal Loveless & Sanford, 1974!. Traditionally, the late CNV wave was thought to reflect motor preparation and therefore to be identical to the readiness potential~Rohrbaugh & Gaillard, 1983!.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Motor programming of response force and movement direction

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effects of movement advance information were assessed on the prestimulus amplitude of the lateralized readiness potential~LRP!, on the contingent negative variation~CNV!, and on reaction time~RT!. In a precuing paradigm with movement parameters hand, direction, and force, partial precues provided advance information about either hand alone, hand plus force, or hand plus direction, and the full precue specified all response parameters. The full precue produced the shortest RTs and the largest CNV amplitude, precuing hand and force or hand and movement direction produced somewhat slower RTs and a somewhat smaller CNV amplitude, and precuing only hand yielded slowest RTs and the smallest CNV amplitude. In contrast, the LRP amplitude was largest for the full precue and was the same for the remaining precues. The CNV appears to index the central assembling of a motor program, and the LRP represents the implementation of the program at more peripheral levels. The introduction of event-related brain potentials~ERPs! in the study of movement preparation has provided new approaches and insights into what had previously been an exclusively behavioral field. The most successful approach in cognitive psychology to analyze the nature of movement preparation employs the precuing technique developed by Rosenbaum~1980, 1983!. This technique is a variant of a choice reaction time~RT! task, in which each of the possible responses is associated with a single imperative stimulus. Before the onset of the stimulus, a precue conveys information about certain movement parameters. Usually, RT decreases with the amount of advance information provided. From the relation between advance information and the corresponding RT saving, cognitive psychologists hoped to learn more about motoric preparation and the nature of motor programs~e.g., Rosenbaum, 1980!. However, this approach was criticized by Goodman and Kelso~1980! who argued that the RT saving observed with this technique does not reflect a genuine motor effect but rather the facilitation of response selection at a premotoric level. The debate on whether the RT saving reflects a genuine motoric effect could not be settled with the traditional behavioral RT measure because the motoric portion of RT is not directly observable.In resolving this controversy, a new measure, the lateralized readiness potential~LRP!, has recently been used~Leuthold, Sommer, & Ulrich, 1996!; there is strong evidence that the LRP provides a specific index to trace the time course of motor activatioñ cf. Coles, Gratton, & Donchin, 1988;De Jong, Wierda, Mulder, & Mulder, 1988;Miller & Hackley, 1992!. Experiments employing LRP often involve a two-choice RT task in which a precue informs the participant about the responding hand and a subsequent imperative stimulus tells the participant that the response should now be made. During the interval between the precue and the imperative stimulus, the motor readiness potential exhibits greater negativity over the motor cortex contralateral to the responding hand,...

show abstract

Slow potential correlates of preparatory set

Cited by 301 publications

References 22 publications

Slow brain potentials preceding task performance

Slow brain potentials preceding task performance

Spinal reflexes as indicator of motor preparation in man

Motor programming of response force and movement direction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About