Hand, Space and Attentional Asymmetries in Goal-Directed Manual Aiming * * Presented at the Canadian Society for Psychomotor Learning and Sport Psychology (SCAPPS), Vancouver, B.C., Canada. October 1995.

Two experiments were conducted to explore the interaction of the two cerebral hemispheres in motor control, by examining hand, space and attentional asymmetries in goal-directed aiming. In Experiment 1, right-handed subjects moved to targets more quickly with their right hand than their left hand. In addition, each hand was faster when moving in its own hemispace. Although in a control condition, movements were initiated more quickly with the left hand, visual distractors disrupted left hand performance more than right hand performance. For contralateral aiming, ipsilateral distractors caused the greatest interference. In Experiment 2, when targets and distractors were all presented at the midline, a right hand advantage was found for movement time along with a left hand advantage for reaction time, independent of target and distractor location. Our findings are discussed in terms of a right hemisphere role in movement preparation and the allocation of attention in space, and greater left hemisphere involvement in movement execution.

[1]  R. Carson,et al.  Manual asymmetries: feedback processing, output variability, and spatial complexity-resolving some inconsistencies. , 1989, Journal of motor behavior.

[2]  Lynn C. Robertson,et al.  A Review of Hemispheric Asymmetry: What's Right and What's Left , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[3]  A. Benton,et al.  Lateral differences in tactile directional perception , 1978, Neuropsychologia.

[4]  Romeo Chua,et al.  The Influence of Target Perturbation on Manual Aiming Asymmetries in Right-Handers , 1995, Cortex.

[5]  D. Elliott,et al.  Asymmetries in the Preparation and Control of Manual Aiming Movements , 1993 .

[6]  B Durding,et al.  Left-handers and right-handers compared on a motor task. , 1979, Journal of motor behavior.

[7]  S. Tipper,et al.  Selective reaching: evidence for action-centered attention. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  P. Reuter-Lorenz,et al.  Visual-auditory interactions in sensorimotor processing: saccades versus manual responses. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  M. Kinsbourne.  Mechanisms of Unilateral Neglect , 1987 .

[10]  S. F. Witelson,et al.  Hemispheric specialization for linguistic and nonlinguistic tactual perception using a dichotomous stimulation technique. , 1974, Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior.

[11]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Movements of attention in the three spatial dimensions and the meaning of “neutral” cues , 1987, Neuropsychologia.

[12]  M. Bryden.  Measuring handedness with questionnaires , 1977, Neuropsychologia.

[13]  Kenneth M. Heilman,et al.  Hemispace and Hemispatial Neglect , 1987 .

[14]  G. Fullerton.  Psychology and physiology. , 1896 .

[15]  G. R. Mangun,et al.  Monitoring the Visual World: Hemispheric Asymmetries and Subcortical Processes in Attention , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[16]  M. Corbetta,et al.  A PET study of visuospatial attention , 1993, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[17]  P. Fitts.  The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[18]  S. Tipper,et al.  Selective reaching: evidence for action-centered attention. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[19]  D. Elliott,et al.  Pedal Asymmetry in the Reproduction of Spatial Locations , 1987, Cortex.

[20]  C. Van Der Staak,et al.  Intra- and interhemispheric visual-motor control of human arm movements , 1975, Neuropsychologia.

[21]  Eric A. Roy,et al.  Handedness Effects in Kinesthetic Spatial Location Judgements , 1978, Cortex.

[22]  Digby Elliott,et al.  Effect of unimanual training on contralateral motor overflow in children and adults , 1987 .

[23]  D. Elliott,et al.  Manual Asymmetries in Aimed Movements , 1989 .

[24]  J. Cullen,et al.  Manual Asymmetries in Goal-Directed Movement: Examination of the Motor Output Hypothesis , 1998, Brain and Cognition.

[25]  John L. Bradshaw,et al.  Abduction, adduction and hand differences in simple and serial movements , 1990, Neuropsychologia.

[26]  M. Peters,et al.  Handedness measured by finger tapping: a continuous variable. , 1978, Canadian journal of psychology.

[27]  D. Elliott,et al.  Manual asymmetries in visually directed aiming. , 1986, Canadian journal of psychology.

[28]  C. H. Vanderwolf,et al.  The relation between hand preference and the performance of individual finger movements by left and right hands. , 1970, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[29]  E Làdavas,et al.  Selective spatial attention in patients with visual extinction. , 1990, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[30]  J. Kelso,et al.  Are movements prepared in parts? Not under compatible (naturalized) conditions. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[31]  K. Heilman,et al.  Right hemispheric dominance for mediating cerebral activation , 1979, Neuropsychologia.

[32]  John I. Todor,et al.  Lateral Asymmetries in Arm, Wrist and Finger Movements , 1982, Cortex.

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

[34]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Space and selective attention , 1994 .

[35]  Romeo Chua,et al.  Asymmetries in the spatial localization of transformed targets , 1992, Brain and Cognition.