The Role of Cue-response Mapping in Motorvisual Impairment and Facilitation: Evidence for Different Roles of Action Planning and Action Control in Motorvisual Dual-task Priming

Overview

Journal J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform

Specialty Psychology

Date 2011 Aug 3

PMID 21806310

Citations 11

Authors

Roland Thomaschke

Brian Hopkins

R Christopher Miall

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Previous research has shown that actions impair the visual perception of categorically action-consistent stimuli. On the other hand, actions can also facilitate the perception of spatially action-consistent stimuli. We suggest that motorvisual impairment is due to action planning processes, while motorvisual facilitation is due to action control mechanisms. This implies that because action planning is sensitive to modulations by cue-response mapping so should motorvisual impairment, while motorvisual facilitation should be insensitive to manipulations of cue-response mapping as is action control. We tested this prediction in three dual-task experiments. The impact of performing left and right key presses on the perception of unrelated, categorically or spatially consistent, stimuli was studied. As expected, we found motorvisual impairment for categorically consistent stimuli and motorvisual facilitation for spatially consistent stimuli. In all experiments, we compared congruent with incongruent cue-key mappings. Mapping manipulations affected motorvisual impairment, but not motorvisual facilitation. The results support our suggestion that motorvisual impairment is due to action planning, and motorvisual facilitation to action control.

Citing Articles

Partial repetition between action plans delays responses to ideomotor compatible stimuli.

Fournier L, Richardson B Psychol Res. 2021; 86(2):627-641.

PMID: 33740105 DOI: 10.1007/s00426-021-01491-9.

Task relevance determines binding of effect features in action planning.

Mocke V, Weller L, Frings C, Rothermund K, Kunde W Atten Percept Psychophys. 2020; 82(8):3811-3831.

PMID: 32914340 PMC: 7593314. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-020-02123-x.

What is a task? An ideomotor perspective.

Kunzell S, Broeker L, Dignath D, Ewolds H, Raab M, Thomaschke R Psychol Res. 2017; 82(1):4-11.

PMID: 29098444 DOI: 10.1007/s00426-017-0942-y.

Visuomotor and motorvisual priming with different types of set-level congruency: evidence in support of ideomotor theory, and the planning and control model (PCM).

Thomaschke R, Miall R, Ruess M, Mehta P, Hopkins B Psychol Res. 2017; 82(6):1073-1090.

PMID: 28756514 PMC: 6132632. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-017-0885-3.

Spatial attention across perception and action.

Israel M, Jolicoeur P, Cohen A Psychol Res. 2016; 82(2):255-271.

PMID: 27778123 DOI: 10.1007/s00426-016-0820-z.

References

Rusconi E, Kwan B, Giordano B, Umilta C, Butterworth B . Spatial representation of pitch height: the SMARC effect. Cognition. 2005; 99(2):113-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.01.004. View

Wilson M, Knoblich G . The case for motor involvement in perceiving conspecifics. Psychol Bull. 2005; 131(3):460-73. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.131.3.460. View

Nishimura A, Yokosawa K . Effects of laterality and pitch height of an auditory accessory stimulus on horizontal response selection: the Simon effect and the SMARC effect. Psychon Bull Rev. 2009; 16(4):666-70. DOI: 10.3758/PBR.16.4.666. View

Lindemann O, Bekkering H . Object manipulation and motion perception: evidence of an influence of action planning on visual processing. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2009; 35(4):1062-71. DOI: 10.1037/a0015023. View

Ansorge U, Wiihr P . A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2004; 30(2):365-77. DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.30.2.365. View

Gherri E, van Velzen J, Eimer M . The instructed context of a motor task modulates covert response preparation and shifts of spatial attention. Psychophysiology. 2009; 46(3):655-67. PMC: 2781104. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00800.x. View

Metzker M, Dreisbach G . Bidirectional priming processes in the Simon task. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2009; 35(6):1770-83. DOI: 10.1037/a0015787. View

Loftus G, Masson M . Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013; 1(4):476-90. DOI: 10.3758/BF03210951. View

Schubo A, Aschersleben G, Prinz W . Interactions between perception and action in a reaction task with overlapping S-R assignments. Psychol Res. 2001; 65(3):145-57. DOI: 10.1007/s004260100061. View

10.

Wolpert D, Miall R, Kawato M . Internal models in the cerebellum. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011; 2(9):338-47. DOI: 10.1016/s1364-6613(98)01221-2. View

11.

Glover S . Separate visual representations in the planning and control of action. Behav Brain Sci. 2004; 27(1):3-24. DOI: 10.1017/s0140525x04000020. View

12.

Hommel B, Musseler J . Action-feature integration blinds to feature-overlapping perceptual events: evidence from manual and vocal actions. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2006; 59(3):509-23. DOI: 10.1080/02724980443000836. View

13.

Desmurget , Grafton . Forward modeling allows feedback control for fast reaching movements. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000; 4(11):423-431. DOI: 10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01537-0. View

14.

Cohen R, Rosenbaum D . Where grasps are made reveals how grasps are planned: generation and recall of motor plans. Exp Brain Res. 2004; 157(4):486-95. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-004-1862-9. View

15.

Miall R, Stanley J, Todhunter S, Levick C, Lindo S, Miall J . Performing hand actions assists the visual discrimination of similar hand postures. Neuropsychologia. 2005; 44(6):966-76. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.09.006. View

16.

Shin Y, Proctor R, Capaldi E . A review of contemporary ideomotor theory. Psychol Bull. 2010; 136(6):943-74. DOI: 10.1037/a0020541. View

17.

Proctor R, Cho Y . Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychol Bull. 2006; 132(3):416-42. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.416. View

18.

Linnell K, Humphreys G, McIntyre D, Laitinen S, Wing A . Action modulates object-based selection. Vision Res. 2005; 45(17):2268-86. DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2005.02.015. View

19.

Singhal A, Culham J, Chinellato E, Goodale M . Dual-task interference is greater in delayed grasping than in visually guided grasping. J Vis. 2008; 7(5):5.1-12. DOI: 10.1167/7.5.5. View

20.

Baldauf D, Deubel H . Visual attention during the preparation of bimanual movements. Vision Res. 2008; 48(4):549-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2007.11.023. View