The integration of sequential aiming movements: Switching hand and direction at the first target

Lawrence, Gavin P.; Khan, Michael A.; Mottram, Thomas M.; Adam, Jos J.; Buckolz, Eric

doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.01.005

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(49 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Any trials that were performed with a reaction time <100 ms or >1000 ms were deemed to be anticipatory and non-reactive responses, respectively. Movement times that exceeded 11 800 ms were considered not to be rapid goal-directed responses (e.g., Lawrence, Khan, Mottram, Adam, & Buckolz, 2016). On each of these occasions then the entire trial was removed before data analysis.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the effect of state anxiety on compensatory and strategic adjustments in the planning of goal-directed aiming

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The anxiety-perceptual-motor performance relationship may be enriched by investigations involving discrete manual responses due to the definitive demarcation of planning and control processes, which comprise the early and late portions of movement, respectively. To further examine the explanatory power of self-focus and distraction theories, we explored the potential of anxiety causing changes to movement planning that accommodate for anticipated negative effects in online control. As a result, we posed two hypotheses where anxiety causes performers to initially undershoot the target and enable more time to use visual feedback ("play-it-safe"), or fire a ballistic reach to cover a greater distance without later undertaking online control ("go-for-it"). Participants were tasked with an upper-limb movement to a single target under counter-balanced instructions to execute fast and accurate responses (low/normal anxiety) with non-contingent negative performance feedback (high anxiety). The results indicated that the previously identified negative impact of anxiety in online control was replicated. While anxiety caused a longer displacement to reach peak velocity and greater tendency to overshoot the target, there appeared to be no shift in the attempts to utilise online visual feedback. Thus, the tendency to initially overshoot may manifest from an inefficient auxiliary procedure that manages to uphold overall movement time and response accuracy.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the effect of state anxiety on compensatory and strategic adjustments in the planning of goal-directed aiming

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The joint action variant of this task involves executing the sequence in pairs with one person being designated as the leader who is responsible for initiating the sequence to the first target, while the other person represents the follower who continues the sequence toward the second target. Because this context features the use of separate upper limbs for each pair of participants, we additionally compared it to a context where participants would execute the same sequence alone, but with one limb aiming toward the first target, and then the other limb aiming toward the second target (e.g., initial right limb movement followed by an extension with the left limb; Khan et al 2010 ; Lawrence et al 2016 ; Reilly et al 2017 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Meanwhile, there was no significant difference between the 2T2L and 2T2P ( p > 0.05). On review of the mean pause times, the 2T1L context was sufficiently short that it appeared the two segments were pre-planned in advance and near fully integrated (Khan et al 2010 ; Lawrence et al 2016 ), while there was a degree of overlap between the first and second segments for the 2T2L and 2T2P contexts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sequential aiming in pairs: the multiple levels of joint action

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The task constraints imposed upon a co-actor can often influence our own actions. Likewise, the observation of somebody else’s movements can involuntarily contaminate the execution of our own movements. These joint action outcomes have rarely been considered in unison. The aim of the present study was to simultaneously examine the underlying processes contributing to joint action. We had pairs of participants work together to execute sequential aiming movements between two targets—the first person’s movement was contingent upon the anticipation of the second person’s movement (leader), while the second person’s movement was contingent upon the direct observation of the first person’s movement (follower). Participants executed separate blocks of two-target aiming movements under different contexts; that is, solely on their own using one (2T1L) and two (2T2L) of their upper limbs, or with another person (2T2P). The first movement segment generally indicated a more abrupt approach (shorter time after peak velocity, greater displacement and magnitude of peak velocity), which surprisingly coincided with lower spatial variability, for the 2T2P context. Meanwhile, the second segment indicated a similar kinematic profile as the first segment for the 2T2P context. The first movement of the leader appeared to accommodate the follower for their movement, while the second movement of the follower was primed by the observation of the leader’s movement. These findings collectively advocate two distinct levels of joint action including the anticipation (top–down) and mapping (bottom–up) of other people’s actions.

show abstract