» Articles » PMID: 39636442

The Multisensory Control of Sequential Actions

Overview
Journal Exp Brain Res
Specialty Neurology
Date 2024 Dec 5
PMID 39636442
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Many motor tasks are comprised of sequentially linked action phases, as when reaching for, lifting, transporting, and replacing a cup of coffee. During such tasks, discrete visual, auditory and/or haptic feedback are typically associated with mechanical events at the completion of each action phase, as when breaking and subsequently making contact between the cup and the table. An emerging concept is that important sensorimotor control operations, that affect subsequent action phases, are centred on these discrete multisensory events. By predicting sensory feedback at the completion of action phases, and comparing with the actual feedback that arises, task performance can be continuously monitored. If errors are detected, the sensorimotor system can quickly respond with task-protective corrective actions. The aim of this study was to investigate how discrete multisensory feedback at the completion of action phases are used in these control operations. To investigate this question, 42 healthy human participants (both male and female) performed a visually guided sequential reaching task where auxiliary discrete visual, auditory and/or haptic feedback was associated with the completion of action phases. Occasionally however, this feedback was removed in one or two modalities. The results show that although the task was visually guided, its control was critically influenced by discrete auditory and haptic feedback. Multisensory integration effects occurred, that enhanced the corrective actions, when auditory feedback was unexpectedly removed along with haptic or visual feedback. This multisensory enhancement may facilitate the ability to detect errors during sequential actions and amplify task-protective corrective actions.

References
1.
van Polanen V . Multisensory information about changing object properties can be used to quickly correct predictive force scaling for object lifting. Exp Brain Res. 2022; 240(7-8):2121-2133. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-022-06404-9. View

2.
Pettypiece C, Goodale M, Culham J . Integration of haptic and visual size cues in perception and action revealed through cross-modal conflict. Exp Brain Res. 2009; 201(4):863-73. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-009-2101-1. View

3.
Stein B, Stanford T, Ramachandran R, Perrault Jr T, Rowland B . Challenges in quantifying multisensory integration: alternative criteria, models, and inverse effectiveness. Exp Brain Res. 2009; 198(2-3):113-26. PMC: 3056521. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-009-1880-8. View

4.
Georgopoulos A . Cognitive motor control: spatial and temporal aspects. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2002; 12(6):678-83. DOI: 10.1016/s0959-4388(02)00382-3. View

5.
Ortega L, Guzman-Martinez E, Grabowecky M, Suzuki S . Audition dominates vision in duration perception irrespective of salience, attention, and temporal discriminability. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2014; 76(5):1485-502. PMC: 4096074. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-014-0663-x. View