» Articles » PMID: 14977617

The Effects of Objectives and Constraints on Motor Control Strategy in Reciprocal Aiming Movements

Overview
Journal J Mot Behav
Publisher Routledge
Specialty Physiology
Date 1992 Jun 1
PMID 14977617
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The goal of this study was to examine how the kinematics of reciprocal aiming movements were affected by both the objective of the movement and the constraints operating on that movement. In Experiment 1, the objective of the movement was indirectly manipulated by capitalizing on the fact that subjects determine their own accuracy and speed limits, despite uniform task instructions to move as quickly and accurately as possible. A Fitts' type reciprocal aiming paradigm was employed, in which 69 subjects were asked to move a stylus repetitively between two spatially separated targets. Four target widths were orthogonally combined with four movement amplitudes, resulting in 16 conditions. Movements were made on an X-Y digitizing tablet. Based on the mean variable error produced on both targets, subjects were differentiated post hoc into three movement objective groups: speed, accuracy, and speed-plus-accuracy. Kinematic analyses revealed that the programming and execution of movements were systematically influenced by both the movement objective and the movement constraints. That is, movement time, peak velocity, dwell time, acceleration and deceleration time, normalized acceleration and normalized deceleration varied systematically as a function of both the speed-accuracy movement objective and the movement constraints of target size and movement distance. Moreover, the consequences of changing the constraints of the movement were affected by an interaction with the objective of the movement. In Experiment 2, the objective of the movement was directly manipulated by varying speed and/or accuracy instructions to subjects. The basic results of Experiment 1 were substantiated. Overall, the results were consistent with the view that motor control is dependent upon sensory consequences.

Citing Articles

Impact of motor task conditions on end-point kinematics and trunk movements during goal-directed arm reach.

Kim B, Girnis J, Sweet V, Nobiling T, Agag T, Neville C Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):4520.

PMID: 38402209 PMC: 10894230. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-54723-4.


Same same but different: Subtle but consequential differences between two measures to linearly integrate speed and accuracy (LISAS vs. BIS).

Liesefeld H, Janczyk M Behav Res Methods. 2022; 55(3):1175-1192.

PMID: 35595937 PMC: 10125931. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-022-01843-2.


Effects of object size and distance on reaching kinematics in patients with schizophrenia.

Wang S, Kuo L, Ouyang W, Hsu H, Ma H Hong Kong J Occup Ther. 2018; 31(1):22-29.

PMID: 30186083 PMC: 6091986. DOI: 10.1177/1569186118759610.


Effects of auditory feedback on movements with two-segment sequence and eye-hand coordination.

Rand M Exp Brain Res. 2018; 236(12):3131-3148.

PMID: 30159590 DOI: 10.1007/s00221-018-5366-4.


Augmented feedback influences upper limb reaching movement times but does not explain violations of Fitts' Law.

de Grosbois J, Heath M, Tremblay L Front Psychol. 2015; 6:800.

PMID: 26136703 PMC: 4468837. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00800.