Response Selection Contributes to the Preparation Cost for Bimanual Asymmetric Movements

ABSTRACT Movement preparation of bimanual asymmetric movements takes more time than bimanual symmetric movements in choice reaction-time conditions. This bimanual asymmetric cost may be caused by increased processing demands on any stage of movement preparation. The authors tested the contributions of each stage of movement preparation to the asymmetric cost by using the additive factors method. This involved altering the stimulus contrast, response compatibility, and response complexity. These manipulations changed the processing demands on stimulus identification, response selection, and response programming, respectively. Any manipulation with a larger reaction time cost than control suggests that stage contributes to the bimanual asymmetric cost. The bimanual asymmetric cost was larger for incompatible stimuli, which supports that response selection contributes to the bimanual asymmetric cost.

[1]  Jörn Diedrichsen,et al.  Bimanual interference associated with the selection of target locations. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  Romeo Chua,et al.  Unified nature of bimanual movements revealed by separating the preparation of each arm , 2015, Experimental Brain Research.

[3]  H. Heuer.  Intermanual Interactions During Programming of Finger Movements: Transient Effects of ‘Homologous Coupling’ , 1986 .

[4]  H. Heuer,et al.  Generation and modulation of action patterns , 1986 .

[5]  Saul Sternberg,et al.  The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method , 1969 .

[6]  D Goodman,et al.  On the coordination of two-handed movements. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  Herbert Heuer,et al.  The influence of movement cues on intermanual interactions , 2006, Psychological research.

[8]  Denis Cousineau,et al.  Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson's method , 2005 .

[9]  S. Swinnen.  Intermanual coordination: From behavioural principles to neural-network interactions , 2002, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[10]  S. Swinnen,et al.  Two hands, one brain: cognitive neuroscience of bimanual skill , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[11]  R. Ivry,et al.  Bimanual cross-talk during reaching movements is primarily related to response selection, not the specification of motor parameters , 2003, Psychological research.

[12]  Nicole Wenderoth,et al.  Visual cues influence motor coordination: behavioral results and potential neural mechanisms mediating perception-action coupling and response selection. , 2009, Progress in brain research.

[13]  H Heuer,et al.  Structural constraints on bimanual movements , 1993, Psychological research.

[14]  R. Ivry,et al.  Moving to Directly Cued Locations Abolishes Spatial Interference During Bimanual Actions , 2001, Psychological science.

[15]  Richard D. Morey,et al.  Confidence Intervals from Normalized Data: A correction to Cousineau (2005) , 2008 .

[16]  Romeo Chua,et al.  Comparing movement preparation of unimanual, bimanual symmetric, and bimanual asymmetric movements , 2013, Experimental Brain Research.

[17]  R. Schmidt,et al.  The locus of intersensory facilitation of reaction time. , 1984, Acta psychologica.

[18]  Scott T. Grafton,et al.  Goal-selection and movement-related conflict during bimanual reaching movements. , 2005, Cerebral cortex.