Location memory biases reveal the challenges of coordinating visual and kinesthetic reference frames

Five experiments explored the influence of visual and kinesthetic/proprioceptive reference frames on location memory. Experiments 1 and 2 compared visual and kinesthetic reference frames in a memory task using visually-specified locations and a visually-guided response. When the environment was visible, results replicated previous findings of biases away from the midline symmetry axis of the task space, with stability for targets aligned with this axis. When the environment was not visible, results showed some evidence of bias away from a kinesthetically-specified midline (trunk anterior–posterior [a–p] axis), but there was little evidence of stability when targets were aligned with body midline. This lack of stability may reflect the challenges of coordinating visual and kinesthetic information in the absence of an environmental reference frame. Thus, Experiments 3–5 examined kinesthetic guidance of hand movement to kinesthetically-defined targets. Performance in these experiments was generally accurate with no evidence of consistent biases away from the trunk a–p axis. We discuss these results in the context of the challenges of coordinating reference frames within versus between multiple sensori-motor systems.

[1]  Anne R. Schutte,et al.  Planning "discrete" movements using a continuous system: insights from a dynamic field theory of movement preparation. , 2007, Motor control.

[2]  J. Gordon,et al.  Learning a visuomotor transformation in a local area of work space produces directional biases in other areas. , 1995, Journal of neurophysiology.

[3]  Warren G. Darling,et al.  Transformations between visual and kinesthetic coordinate systems in reaches to remembered object locations and orientations , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[4]  E. A. Roy,et al.  Memory for kinesthetically defined target location: Evidence for manual asymmetries , 2001, Brain and Cognition.

[5]  J. F. Soechting,et al.  Sensorimotor representations for pointing to targets in three-dimensional space. , 1989, Journal of neurophysiology.

[6]  S. Palmer,et al.  Orientation and symmetry: effects of multiple, rotational, and near symmetries. , 1978, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.

[7]  Jinsung Wang,et al.  Adaptation to Visuomotor Rotations Remaps Movement Vectors, Not Final Positions , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[8]  J. Huttenlocher,et al.  Bias in spatial location due to categorization: comment on Tversky and Schiano. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[9]  B. Abernethy,et al.  Expertise and Attunement to Kinematic Constraints , 2008, Perception.

[10]  F. Lacquaniti,et al.  Viewer-centered frame of reference for pointing to memorized targets in three-dimensional space. , 1997, Journal of neurophysiology.

[11]  W. Darling,et al.  The Visual Perception Coordinate System Uses Axes Defined by the Earth, Trunk, and Vision , 2005, Perception.

[12]  Anne R. Schutte,et al.  Toward a formal theory of flexible spatial behavior: geometric category biases generalize across pointing and verbal response types. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  John P Spencer,et al.  Prototypes and particulars: geometric and experience-dependent spatial categories. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[14]  J. Spencer,et al.  Carving up space at imaginary joints: can people mentally impose arbitrary spatial category boundaries? , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  J. F. Soechting,et al.  Errors in pointing are due to approximations in sensorimotor transformations. , 1989, Journal of neurophysiology.

[16]  M. Latash,et al.  Effects of altering initial position on movement direction and extent. , 2003, Journal of neurophysiology.

[17]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  Immediate memory for spatial location. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[18]  W. G. Darling,et al.  Kinesthetic perceptions of earth- and body- fixed axes , 1999, Experimental Brain Research.

[19]  A. Hein,et al.  Neck muscle vibration modifies the representation of visual motion and direction in man. , 1988, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[20]  C. Gallistel The organization of learning , 1990 .

[21]  F. Lacquaniti,et al.  Short-Term Memory for Reaching to Visual Targets: Psychophysical Evidence for Body-Centered Reference Frames , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[22]  J. Spencer,et al.  The Emerging Spatial Mind , 2007 .

[23]  Gregor Schöner,et al.  Reference-related inhibition produces enhanced position discrimination and fast repulsion near axes of symmetry , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.

[24]  Diane J. Schiano,et al.  Perceptual and conceptual factors in distortions in memory for graphs and maps. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[25]  Anne C. Sittig,et al.  The precision of proprioceptive position sense , 1998, Experimental Brain Research.

[26]  Martin Lemay,et al.  Multiple frames of reference for pointing to a remembered target , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[27]  L. Hedges,et al.  Categories and particulars: prototype effects in estimating spatial location. , 1991, Psychological review.

[28]  H. Karnath,et al.  The perception of body orientation after neck-proprioceptive stimulation , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[29]  J. Huttenlocher,et al.  Making Space: The Development of Spatial Representation and Reasoning , 2000 .

[30]  Gregor Schöner,et al.  What does theoretical neuroscience have to offer the study of behavioral development?:Insights from a dynamic field theory of spatial cognition , 2007 .

[31]  P. Wenderoth,et al.  Local and global mechanisms of one- and two-dimensional orientation illusions , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.