A Movement Constraint Interpretation of the Response Complexity Effect on Programming Time

This paper reinterprets data from five recently published experiments on response complexity and programming time in which number of movement parts of rapidly executed limb responses was advanced as the principal element influencing length of response programming time. Alternatively it is argued here that programming time, in these experiments, was predominantly a function of the constraints placed upon the output of the motor system by the demand for movement accuracy. The quantification of this accuracy demand is achieved by using the metric of Index of Difficulty (Fitts, 1954). In discrete and straight-line tapping responses to circular targets, response complexity may be conceptualized in terms of the angular constraint imposed on movement initiation at the start key. When responses require changes of direction between movement parts it is proposed that programming time may be a function of the cumulative movement constraints imposed by the task. The discussion focuses on the process by which an increased accuracy demand requires a more constrained motor system output which is brought about by a larger and/or more precise muscle synergy recruitment pattern, resulting in an increase in programming time.

[1]  C. W. Greene THE AMERICAN PHYSIOLOGICAL SOCIETY. , 1922, Science.

[2]  R. Kretchmar Exercise and Sport Science , 1989 .

[3]  D J Glencross,et al.  The latency of aiming movements. , 1976, Journal of motor behavior.

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

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

[6]  D. J. Glencross,et al.  Latency and response complexity. , 1972, Journal of motor behavior.

[7]  D J Glencross,et al.  Response complexity and the latency of different movement patterns. , 1973, Journal of motor behavior.

[8]  S. T. Klapp,et al.  Short-term memory as a response preparation state , 1976, Memory & cognition.

[9]  G. Stelmach Motor Control: Issues and Trends , 1976 .

[10]  Robert W. Christina,et al.  Simple Reaction Time as a Function of Response Complexity: Christina et al. (1982) Revisited. , 1985 .

[11]  R. E. Hicks,et al.  Bilateral reminiscence in inverted-reversed printing. , 1972, Journal of motor behavior.

[12]  S. T. Klapp,et al.  Relation between programming time and duration of the response being programmed. , 1976, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  F M Henry,et al.  Use of simple reaction time in motor programming studies: a reply to Klapp, Wyatt and Lingo. , 1980, Journal of motor behavior.

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

[15]  Steven W. Keele,et al.  Movement control in skilled motor performance. , 1968 .

[16]  Martenuik Rg,et al.  Methods in the study of motor programming: is it just a matter of simple vs. choice reaction time? A comment on Klapp et al. (1979). , 1981 .

[17]  H. Zelaznik,et al.  Motor-output variability: a theory for the accuracy of rapid motor acts. , 1979, Psychological review.

[18]  J. S. Brown,et al.  Discrete movements in the horizontal plane as a function of their length and direction. , 1949, Journal of experimental psychology.

[19]  F. M. Henry,et al.  Increased Response Latency for Complicated Movements and A “Memory Drum” Theory of Neuromotor Reaction , 1960 .

[20]  C. I. Howarth,et al.  The relationship between speed and accuracy of movement aimed at a target , 1971 .

[21]  H N Zelaznik,et al.  Target-size influences on reaction time with movement time controlled. , 1980, Journal of motor behavior.

[22]  Stephen Monsell,et al.  The Latency and Duration of Rapid Movement Sequences: Comparisons of Speech and Typewriting , 1978 .

[23]  R. B. Freeman,et al.  Cognition and Motor Processes , 1983 .

[24]  R. Marteniuk,et al.  Dimensions of Motor Task Complexity , 1976 .

[25]  M G Fischman,et al.  Programming time as a function of number of movement parts and changes in movement direction. , 1984, Journal of motor behavior.

[26]  J G Anson,et al.  Memory drum theory: alternative tests and explanations for the complexity effects on simple reaction time. , 1982, Journal of motor behavior.

[27]  S T Klapp,et al.  Motor programming is not the only process which can influence RT: some thoughts on the Marteniuk and MacKenzie analysis. , 1981, Journal of motor behavior.

[28]  K. M. Newell,et al.  Relative contribution of movement time, amplitude, and velocity to response initiation. , 1980 .

[29]  G. Stelmach Information processing in motor control and learning , 1978 .

[30]  S. T. Klapp,et al.  Implicit speech in reading: Reconsidered , 1973 .

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

[32]  M L Norrie,et al.  Effects of movement complexity on choice reaction and movement times. , 1974, Research quarterly.

[33]  K. Hayes,et al.  Premotor and motor reaction time as a function of movement extent . , 1973, Journal of motor behavior.

[34]  M L Norrie,et al.  Practice effects on reaction latency for simple and complex movements. , 1967, Research quarterly.

[35]  Debra J. Rose,et al.  Premotor and Motor Reaction Time As a Function of Response Complexity , 1985 .

[36]  D. Meyer,et al.  Conditions for a Linear Speed-Accuracy Trade-Off in Aimed Movements , 1983, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[37]  P. Fitts,et al.  INFORMATION CAPACITY OF DISCRETE MOTOR RESPONSES. , 1964, Journal of experimental psychology.

[38]  K. Newell,et al.  Movement time and velocity as determinants of movement timing accuracy. , 1979, Journal of motor behavior.

[39]  M G Fischman,et al.  Simple reaction time as a function of response complexity: memory drum theory revisited. , 1982, Journal of motor behavior.