Individual differences in motor planning during a multi-segment object manipulation task

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Deutscher übersetzter Titel:Individuelle Unterschiede bei der Bewegungsplanung während einer mehrteiligen Objekt-Manipulationsaufgabe
Autor:Seegelke, Christian; Hughes, Charmayne Mary Lee; Schütz, Christoph; Schack, Thomas
Erschienen in:Experimental brain research
Veröffentlicht:222 (2012), 1/2, S. 125-136, Lit.
Format: Literatur (SPOLIT)
Publikationstyp: Zeitschriftenartikel
Medienart: Gedruckte Ressource
Sprache:Englisch
ISSN:0014-4819, 1432-1106
DOI:10.1007/s00221-012-3203-8
Schlagworte:
Online Zugang:
Erfassungsnummer:PU201403002854
Quelle:BISp

Abstract

Research has demonstrated that people will adopt initially awkward grasps if they afford more comfortable postures at the end of the movement. This end-state comfort effect provides evidence that humans represent future posture states and select appropriate grasps in anticipation of these postures. The purpose of the study was to examine to what extent the final action goal of a task influences motor planning of preceding segments, and whether grasp postures are planned to optimize end-state comfort during a three-segment action sequence in which two objects are manipulated, and participants can select from a continuous range of possible grasp postures. In the current experiment, participants opened a drawer, grasped an object from inside the drawer, and placed it on a table in one of the three target orientations (0°, 90°, or 180° object rotation required). Grasp postures during the initial movement segment (drawer opening) were not influenced by the final action goal (i.e., required target orientation). In contrast, both the intermediate (i.e., object grasping) and the final movement segment (i.e., object placing) were influenced by target orientation. In addition, participants adopted different strategies to achieve the action goal when the object required 180° rotation, with 42 % of participants prioritizing intermediate-state comfort and 58 % prioritizing end-state comfort. The results indicate that individuals optimize task performance by selecting lower level constraints that allow for successful completion of the action goal and that the selection of these constraints is dependent upon contextual, environmental, and internal influences. Verf.-Referat