Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-05-2009 | Original Article

Dissociating cognitive and motor interference effects on kinesthetic short-term memory

Auteurs: Waldemar Kirsch, Erwin Hennighausen, Frank Rösler

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 3/2009

Abstract

In two experiments, we investigated how short-term memory of kinesthetically defined spatial locations suffers from either motor or cognitive distraction. In Exp. 1, 22 blindfolded participants moved a handle with their right hand towards a mechanical stop and back to the start and then reproduced the encoded stop position by a second movement. The retention interval was adjusted to approximately 0 and 8 s. In half of the trials participants had to provide a verbal judgment of the target distance after encoding (cognitive distractor). Analyses of constant and variable errors indicated that the verbal judgments interfered with the motor reproduction only, when the retention interval was long. In Exp. 2, 22 other participants performed the same task but instead of providing verbal distance estimations they performed an additional movement either with their right or left hand during the retention interval. Constant error was affected by the side of the interpolated movement (right vs. left hand) and by the delay interval. The results show that reproduction of kinesthetically encoded spatial locations is affected differently in long- and short-retention intervals by cognitive and motor interference. This suggests that reproduction behavior is based on distinct codes during immediate vs. delayed recall.

vorige artikel Does unconscious thought improve complex decision making?

volgende artikel Investigating the role of conflict resolution in memory updating by means of the one-back choice RT task

We report uncorrected degrees of freedom and corrected p values in the “Results” section.

In similar experimental setups, we found that also the standard deviation, i.e. a measure not relativized to the mean amplitude, did not reflect the typically observed increase in variability with distance. In contrast, the pattern resembled the reported result, i.e. increasing distance was associated with a decrease in response variability (see Kirsch et al., 2008).

Beilock, S. L., & Carr, T. H. (2001). On the fragility of skilled performance: what governs choking under pressure? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 701–725.CrossRef

Beilock, S. L., Carr, T. H., MacMahon, C., & Starkes, J. L. (2002). When paying attention becomes counterproductive: impact of divided versus skill-focused attention on novice and experienced performance of sensorimotor skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 6–16.PubMedCrossRef

Bradshaw, M. F., & Watt, S. J. (2002). A dissociation of perception and action in normal human observers: the effect of temporal delay. Neuropsychologia, 40, 1766–1778.PubMedCrossRef

Bridgeman, B., Gemmer, A., Forsman, T., & Huemer, V. (2000). Processing spatial information in the sensorimotor branch of the visual system. Vision Research, 40, 3539–3552.PubMedCrossRef

Diewert, G. L. (1975). Retention and coding in motor short-term memory: A comparison of storage codes for distance and location information. Journal of Motor Behavior, 7, 183–190.

Elliott, D., & Madalena, J. (1987). The influence of premovement visual information on manual aiming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 541–559.

Flanagan, J. R., & Beltzner, M. A. (2000). Independence of perceptual and sensorimotor predictions in the size-weight illusion. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 737–741.PubMedCrossRef

Geisser, S., & Greenhouse, S. W. (1958). An extension of Box’s results on the use of the F distribution in multivariate analysis. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 29, 885–891.CrossRef

Goodale, M. A., Jakobson, L. S., & Keillor, J. M. (1994). Differences in the visual control of pantomimed and natural grasping movements. Neuropsychologia, 32, 1159–1178.PubMedCrossRef

Goodale, M. A., & Milner, A. D. (1992). Separate visual pathway for perception and action. Trends in Neurosciences, 1, 20–25.CrossRef

Goodale, M. A., Westwood, D. A., & Milner, A. (2004). Two distinct modes of control for object-directed action. Progress in Brain Research, 144, 131–144.PubMedCrossRef

Grandy, M. S., & Westwood, D. A. (2006). Opposite perceptual and sensorimotor responses to a size-weight illusion. Journal of Neurophysiology, 95, 3887–3892.PubMedCrossRef

Granit, R. (1972). Constant errors in the execution and appreciation of movement. Brain, 95, 649–660.CrossRef

Hagman, J. D. (1978). Specific-cue effects of interpolated movements on distance and location retention in short-term memory. Memory and Cognition, 6, 432–437.

Harris, J. A., Harris, I. M., & Diamond, M. E. (2001). Topography of tactile working memory. Journal of Neuroscience, 21, 8262–8269.PubMed

Hu, Y., Eagleson, R., & Goodale, M. A. (1999). The effects of delay on the kinematics of grasping. Experimental Brain Research, 126, 109–116.CrossRef

Jeannerod, M., Arbib, M. A., Rizzolatti, G., & Sakata, H. (1995). Grasping objects: the cortical mechanisms of visuomotor transformation. Trends in Neurosciences, 18, 314–320.PubMedCrossRef

Jones, L. A. (1986). Perception of force and weight: theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 29–42.PubMedCrossRef

Kirsch, W., Hennighausen, E., & Rösler, F. (2008). Electrophysiological markers of encoding and error processing in a motor matching task (in preparation).

Laabs, G. J. (1973). Retention characteristics of different reproduction cues in motor short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 100, 168–177.PubMedCrossRef

Laabs, G. J. (1974). The effect of interpolated motor activity on the short-term retention of movement distance and end-location. Journal of Motor Behavior, 6, 279–288.

Laabs, G. J. (1976). A note concerning the effect of a kinesthetic memory load on the retention of movement end-location. Journal of Motor Behavior, 8, 313–316.

Laabs, G. J., & Simmons, R. W. (1981). Motor memory. In D. H. Holding (Ed.), Human skills (pp. 119–152). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

Laszlo, J. I. (1992). Motor control and learning: how far do the experimental tasks restrict our theoretical insight? In J. J. Summers (Ed.), Approaches to the study of motor control and learning (pp. 47–79). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRef

Murray, D. J., Ellis, R. R., Bandomir, C. A., & Ross, H. E. (1999). Charpentier (1891) on the size-weight illusion. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1681–1685.

Navon, D., & Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human-processing system. Psychological Review, 86, 214–255.CrossRef

Norman, J. (2002). Two visual systems and two theories of perception: An attempt to reconcile the constructivist and ecological approaches. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 73–144.PubMed

Norman, D. A., & Bobrow, D. G. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 44–64.CrossRef

Paillard, J. (1987). Cognitive versus sensori-motor encoding of spatial information. In P. Ellen & C. Thinus-Blanc (Eds.), Cognitive processes and spatial orientation in animal and man (pp. 43–77). Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.

Posner, M. I. (1967). Characteristics of visual and kinesthetic memory codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75, 103–107.PubMedCrossRef

Rossetti, Y. (1998). Implicit short-lived motor representation of space in brain-damaged and healthy subjects. Consciousness and Cognition, 7, 520–558.PubMedCrossRef

Rossetti, Y., & Pisella, L. (2002). Several vision for action systems: a guide to dissociating and integrating dorsal and ventral functions. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Attention and performance XIX: Common mechanisms in perception and action (pp. 62–119). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rossetti, Y., Rode, G., & Boisson, D. (1995). Implicit processing of somaesthetic information: a dissociation between where and how? Neuroreport, 6, 506–510.PubMedCrossRef

Smyth, M. M. (1984). Memory for movements. In M. M. Smyth & A. Wing (Eds.), The psychology of human movement (pp. 83–117). London: Academic Press.

Soechting, J. F., & Flanders, M. (1992). Moving in three-dimensional space: Frames of reference, vectors, and coordinate systems. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 15, 167–191.PubMedCrossRef

Tillery, S. I., Flanders, M., & Soechting, J. F. (1994). Errors in kinesthetic transformations for hand apposition. Neuroreport, 6, 177–181.PubMedCrossRef

Trumbo, D., Milone, F., & Noble, M. (1972). Interpolated activity and response mechanisms in motor short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 93, 205–212.PubMedCrossRef

Vaillancourt, D. E., & Russell, D. M. (2002). Temporal capacity of short-term visuomotor memory in continuous force production. Experimental Brain Research, 145, 275–285.CrossRef

Wolpert, D. M., Ghahramani, Z., & Jordan, M. I. (1995). An internal model for sensorimotor integration. Science, 269, 1880–1882.PubMedCrossRef

Wulf, G., McNevin, N., & Shea, C. H. (2001). The automaticity of complex motor skill learning as a function of attentional focus. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, A, 54, 1143–1154.CrossRef

Titel: Dissociating cognitive and motor interference effects on kinesthetic short-term memory
Auteurs: Waldemar Kirsch
Erwin Hennighausen
Frank Rösler
Publicatiedatum: 01-05-2009
Uitgeverij: Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 3/2009
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-008-0159-1

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2009

Emotional Stroop task: effect of word arousal and subject anxiety on emotional interference

When similarity leads to sparing: probing mechanisms underlying the attentional blink

“Octave illusion” or “Deutsch’s illusion”?

Matching of visual input to only one item at any one time

The effects of dividing attention on the encoding and performance of novel naturalistic actions

Perceptual and attentional factors in encoding irrelevant spatial information