Reaction time methods in the study of motor programming: the precuing of hand, digit, and duration.

Recent reaction time analysis of motor programming has utilized a precue stimulus that provides advance information about some or all of the attributes for the upcoming motor response. This kind of precue typically confounds the number of remaining stimuli with the motoric processes under investigation (Zelaznik, 1978). In Experiments 1 and 2 the precuing of hand, digit, and duration of a key press response was manipulated. A new precuing procedure was utilized that does not confound the number of stimuli with the motoric processes under investigation. The findings of Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrate that none of the advance information was helpful in reducing reaction time and as such, suggest that these features of movement are not selected in any particular order. Experiment 3 compared this new method of precuing to the other, traditional method. The results of this experiment suggested that there is parallel processing of the perceptual and motor mental operations in this reaction-time task, since there was an underadditive interaction between the number of stimulus response alternatives and the non-precued movement dimensions. This paper highlights problems inherent in the utilization of precursing methods to understand motor programming processes. It appears that a better understanding about the variables involved in movement control is necessary before examining the order of selection of those variables.

[1]  B. Kerr,et al.  Is reaction time different for long and short response durations in simple and choice conditions? , 1979, Journal of motor behavior.

[2]  David Goodman,et al.  Are movements prepared in parts? Not under compatible (naturalized) conditions. , 1980 .

[3]  S. T. Klapp,et al.  Response programming in simple and choice reactions. , 1974, Journal of motor behavior.

[4]  W A Sparrow,et al.  The efficiency of skilled performance. , 1983, Journal of motor behavior.

[5]  W. E. Hick Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 1948, Nature.

[6]  S T Klapp,et al.  Programming time as a function of response duration: a replication of "dit-dah" without possible guessing artifacts. , 1982, Journal of motor behavior.

[7]  A. Sanders 20 Stage Analysis of Reaction Processes , 1980 .

[8]  G A Frekany,et al.  Planning and preparing expected and unexpected movements: reexamining the relationships of arm, direction, and extent of movement. , 1985, Journal of motor behavior.

[9]  D. C. Shapiro,et al.  Evidence for generalized motor programs using gait pattern analysis. , 1981, Journal of motor behavior.

[10]  D. Rosenbaum The Movement Precuing Technique: Assumptions, Applications, and Extensions , 1983 .

[11]  Keith E. Stanovich,et al.  Encoding, stimulus-response compatibility, and stages of processing , 1977 .

[12]  S. T. Klapp,et al.  REACTION TIME ANALYSIS Of PROGRAMMED CONTROL , 1977, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[13]  S. Kornblum Response competition and/or inhibition in two-choice reaction time , 1965 .

[14]  J. Miller Discrete versus continuous stage models of human information processing: in search of partial output. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  Richard Schweickert,et al.  A critical path generalization of the additive factor method: Analysis of a stroop task , 1978 .

[16]  S T Klapp,et al.  Technical considerations regarding the short (dit)-long (dah) key press paradigm. , 1981, Journal of motor behavior.

[17]  S T Klapp,et al.  The memory drum theory after twenty years: comments on Henry's note. , 1980, Journal of motor behavior.

[18]  H Zelaznik,et al.  Precueing response factors in choice reaction time: a word of caution. , 1978, Journal of motor behavior.

[19]  P. N. Kugler,et al.  Patterns of human interlimb coordination emerge from the properties of non-linear, limit cycle oscillatory processes: theory and data. , 1981, Journal of motor behavior.

[20]  D. Vicario,et al.  The control of rapid limb movement in the cat II. Scaling of isometric force adjustments , 1978, Experimental brain research.

[21]  D. Rosenbaum,et al.  A priming method for investigating the selection of motor responses , 1982 .

[22]  W H Teichner,et al.  Laws of the simple visual reaction time. , 1972, Psychological review.

[23]  James L. McClelland On the time relations of mental processes: An examination of systems of processes in cascade. , 1979 .

[24]  R. Schmidt Past and future issues in motor programming. , 1980, Research quarterly for exercise and sport.

[26]  S. T. Klapp,et al.  Motor programming within a sequence of responses. , 1976, Journal of motor behavior.

[27]  B. Kerr,et al.  Task Factors That Influence Selection and Preparation for Voluntary Movements , 1978 .

[28]  H N Zelaznik,et al.  The specification of digit and duration during motor programming: a new method of precueing. , 1982, Journal of motor behavior.

[29]  H N Zelaznik,et al.  The effects of force and direction uncertainty of choice reaction time in an isometric force production task. , 1981, Journal of motor behavior.

[30]  S T Klapp,et al.  Response programming, as assessed by reaction time, does not establish commands for particular muscles. , 1977, Journal of motor behavior.

[31]  D. Rosenbaum Human movement initiation: specification of arm, direction, and extent. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. General.