Limits to human movement planning with delayed and unpredictable onset of needed information

In motor tasks with explicit rewards and penalties, humans choose movement strategies that nearly maximize expected gain (Trommershäuser et al. in J Opt Soc Am A 20:1419–1433, 2003). Here, we examine whether performance is still close to optimal when information about payoffs is not available prior to movement onset. Subjects rapidly touched a target region while trying to avoid hitting an overlapping penalty region placed randomly to the left or right of the target. Subjects received rewards and incurred penalties for hitting the corresponding regions. Late responses (>700 ms) were heavily penalized. The penalty region was displayed 0, 200 or 400 ms after the reward region and the subject could not know where it would be until then. Reaction times to begin the movement after stimulus appearance were constant across conditions. Median reaction times were approximately 200 ms, i.e., the time the penalty was first displayed in the 200 ms delay condition. Performance was compared to that of an optimal movement planner that chooses mean end points to maximize expected gain despite movement variability. In the 0 and 200 ms delay conditions, subjects selected strategies that did not differ significantly from optimal, indicating that humans are able to plan their movements well despite delayed and unpredictable onset of information. Performance dropped below optimal in the 400 ms delay condition, with mean movement end points closer to the penalty region than predicted by the optimal strategy (in the high-penalty condition). We conclude that relevant information concerning the reward structure is required between 200 and 400 ms prior to the end of the movement, but can still be integrated into the movement plan after movement initiation.

[1]  Robert Sessions Woodworth,et al.  THE ACCURACY OF VOLUNTARY MOVEMENT , 1899 .

[2]  M. Posner,et al.  Processing of visual feedback in rapid movements. , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

[3]  B. Bridgeman,et al.  Relation between cognitive and motor-oriented systems of visual position perception. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  M. Jeannerod The neural and behavioural organization of goal-directed movements , 1990, Psychological Medicine.

[5]  Steven M. Finbeiner,et al.  The Neural and Behavioral Organization of Goal-Directed Movements , 1989, The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine.

[6]  E. Komilis,et al.  Error processing in pointing at randomly feedback-induced double-step stimuli. , 1993, Journal of motor behavior.

[7]  Loukia D. Loukopoulos,et al.  Planning reaches by evaluating stored postures. , 1995, Psychological review.

[8]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[9]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Obstacle Avoidance and a Perturbation Sensitivity Model for Motor Planning , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[10]  S. Tipper,et al.  Selective Reaching to Grasp: Evidence for Distractor Interference Effects , 1997 .

[11]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[12]  D. Pélisson,et al.  From Eye to Hand: Planning Goal-directed Movements , 1998, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[13]  M. A. Goodale,et al.  The role of visual feedback of hand position in the control of manual prehension , 1999, Experimental Brain Research.

[14]  Matthew Heath,et al.  The control of goal-directed limb movements: Correcting errors in the trajectory , 1999 .

[15]  Umberto Castiello,et al.  The effects of abrupt onset of 2-D and 3-D distractors on prehension movements , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  T. Schmidt The Finger in Flight: Real-Time Motor Control by Visually Masked Color Stimuli , 2002, Psychological science.

[17]  D. Wolpert,et al.  Controlling the statistics of action: obstacle avoidance. , 2002, Journal of neurophysiology.

[18]  Peter Dixon,et al.  Dynamic effects of the Ebbinghaus illusion in grasping: Support for a planning/control model of action , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[19]  Michael S Landy,et al.  Statistical decision theory and the selection of rapid, goal-directed movements. , 2003, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[20]  M. Landy,et al.  Statistical decision theory and trade-offs in the control of motor response. , 2003, Spatial vision.

[21]  Thomas Schmidt,et al.  Immediate spatial distortions of pointing movements induced by visual landmarks , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[22]  J. Vercher,et al.  Online control of the direction of rapid reaching movements , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[23]  David C Knill,et al.  Visual Feedback Control of Hand Movements , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[24]  David C. Knill,et al.  Humans use continuous visual feedback from the hand to control both the direction and distance of pointing movements , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[25]  Jeroen B. J. Smeets,et al.  Colour vision can contribute to fast corrections of arm movements , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[26]  M. Goodale,et al.  Visual control of reaching movements without vision of the limb , 1986, Experimental Brain Research.

[27]  M. Goodale,et al.  Visual control of reaching movements without vision of the limb , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[28]  M. Goodale,et al.  An evolving view of duplex vision: separate but interacting cortical pathways for perception and action , 2004, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[29]  M. Landy,et al.  Optimal Compensation for Changes in Task-Relevant Movement Variability , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[30]  S. Tipper,et al.  Hand deviations away from visual cues: Indirect evidence for inhibition , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.