Top

Gepubliceerd in:

20-01-2017 | Original Article

Numerical magnitude affects online execution, and not planning of visuomotor control

Auteurs: Gal Namdar, Tzvi Ganel

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 3/2018

Abstract

Recent literature has established a directional influence of irrelevant numerical magnitude on actions performed toward neutral objects. For example, fingers’ aperture during grasping is larger when associated with large compared with small numerical digits. This interaction between symbolic magnitude and visuomotor control has been attributed to the planning stage of the action prior to motor execution. However, this assumption has not been directly tested. In two experiments, we tested whether the effects of numerical magnitude on grasping derive from action planning or from action execution. Participants were asked to grasp an object following a short visual (Experiment 1) or auditory (Experiment 2) presentation of small (1/2) or large (8/9) digits. Grasping was performed under either closed-loop (CL) or open-loop (OL) visuomotor control, for which online vision was prevented during action execution. Digit magnitude affected grip apertures in the CL condition, when online vision was allowed. However, magnitude had no effects on grip aperture in the OL condition. This pattern of results strongly suggests that the processing of numerical magnitude originates from interactions between numerical magnitude and real object size during online motor execution. Unlike previously assumed, the findings also suggest that the effect of magnitude on visuomotor control is not likely to be attributed to the motor planning stage prior to action initiation.

vorige artikel The effects of training on tactile enumeration

volgende artikel Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation over the primary motor cortex does not enhance the learning benefits of self-controlled feedback schedules

Alards-Tomalin, D., Walker, A. C., Shaw, J. D. M., & Leboe-McGowan, L. C. (2015). Is 9 louder than 1? Audiovisual cross-modal interactions between number magnitude and judged sound loudness. Acta Psychologica, 160, 95–103.CrossRefPubMed

Andres, M., Ostry, D. J., Nicol, F., & Paus, T. (2008). Time course of number magnitude interference during grasping. Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior, 44(4), 414–419.CrossRefPubMed

Badets, A., Andres, M., Di Luca, S., & Pesenti, M. (2007). Number magnitude potentiates action judgements. Experimental Brain Research, 180(3), 525–534.CrossRefPubMed

Badets, A., & Pesenti, M. (2011). Finger-number interaction. Experimental Psychology, 58(4), 287–292.CrossRefPubMed

Binetti, N., Hagura, N., Fadipe, C., Tomassini, A., Walsh, V., & Bestmann, S. (2015). Binding space and time through action. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 282(1805), 20150381.

Cant, J. S., Westwood, D. A., Valyear, K. F., & Goodale, M. A. (2005). No evidence for visuomotor priming in a visually guided action task. Neuropsychologia, 43(2), 216–226.CrossRefPubMed

Castelli, F., Glaser, D. E., & Butterworth, B. (2006). Discrete and analogue quantity processing in the parietal lobe: A functional MRI study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(12), 4693–4698.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Chiou, R. Y.-C., Chang, E. C., Tzeng, O. J.-L., & Wu, D. H. (2009). The common magnitude code underlying numerical and size processing for action but not for perception. Experimental Brain Research, 194(4), 553–562.CrossRefPubMed

Chiou, R. Y.-C., Wu, D. H., Tzeng, O. J.-L., Hung, D. L., & Chang, E. C. (2012). Relative size of numerical magnitude induces a size-contrast effect on the grip scaling of reach-to-grasp movements. Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior, 48(8), 1043–1051.CrossRefPubMed

Dormal, V., & Pesenti, M. (2012). Processing magnitudes within the parietal cortex. Horizons in Neuroscience Research, 8, 107–140.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior research methods, 39(2), 175–191.CrossRefPubMed

Fias, W., Lammertyn, J., Reynvoet, B., Dupont, P., & Orban, G. A. (2003). Parietal representation of symbolic and nonsymbolic magnitude. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15(1), 47–56.CrossRefPubMed

Franz, V. H., Hesse, C., & Kollath, S. (2009). Visual illusions, delayed grasping, and memory: no shift from dorsal to ventral control. Neuropsychologia, 47(6), 1518–1531.CrossRefPubMed

Frey, S. H., Vinton, D., Norlund, R., & Grafton, S. T. (2005). Cortical topography of human anterior intraparietal cortex active during visually guided grasping. Cognitive Brain Research, 23(2–3), 397–405.CrossRefPubMed

Gentilucci, M. (2003). Object motor representation and language. Experimental Brain Research, 153(2), 260–265.CrossRefPubMed

Gentilucci, M., Benuzzi, F., Bertolani, L., Daprati, E., & Gangitano, M. (2000). Language and motor control. Experimental Brain Research, 133(4), 468–490.CrossRefPubMed

Gentilucci, M., & Gangitano, M. (1998). Influence of automatic word reading on motor control. European Journal of Neuroscience, 10(2), 752–756.CrossRefPubMed

Gianelli, C., Ranzini, M., Marzocchi, M., Micheli, L. R., & Borghi, A. M. (2012). Influence of numerical magnitudes on the free choice of an object position. Cognitive Processing, 13(1), 185–188.CrossRef

Glover, S. (2002). Visual illusions affect planning but not control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(7), 288–292.CrossRefPubMed

Glover, S. (2004). Separate visual representations in the planning and control of action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(01), 3–24.PubMed

Glover, S., & Dixon, P. (2001a). Motor adaptation to an optical illusion. Experimental Brain Research, 137(2), 254–258.

Glover, S., & Dixon, P. (2001b). The role of vision in the on-line correction of illusion effects on action. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 55(2), 96.

Glover, S., & Dixon, P. (2002a). Dynamic effects of the Ebbinghaus illusion in grasping: support for a planning/control model of action. Perception & Psychophysics, 64(2), 266–278.

Glover, S., & Dixon, P. (2002b). Semantics affect the planning but not control of grasping. Experimental Brain Research, 146(3), 383–387.

Glover, S., Rosenbaum, D. A., Graham, J., & Dixon, P. (2003). Grasping the meaning of words. Experimental Brain Research, 154(1), 103–108.CrossRefPubMed

Glover, S. R., & Dixon, P. (2001c). Dynamic illusion effects in a reaching task: Evidence for separate visual representations in the planning and control of reaching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(3), 560–572.

Goodale, M. A., & Ganel, T. (2016). Different modes of visual organization for perception and for action. In J. Wagemans (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of perceptual organization (pp. 672–690). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Goodale, M. A., Jakobson, L. S., & Keillor, J. M. (1994). Differences in the visual control of pantomimed and natural grasping movements. Neuropsychologia, 32(10), 1159–1178.CrossRefPubMed

Goodale, M. A., & Milner, A. D. (1992). Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends in Neurosciences, 15(1), 20–25.CrossRefPubMed

Heath, M., Rival, C., Westwood, D. A., & Neely, K. (2005). Time Course Analysis of Closed- and Open-Loop Grasping of the Müller-Lyer Illusion. Journal of Motor Behavior, 37(3), 179–185.CrossRefPubMed

Hesse, C., & Franz, V. H. (2009). Memory mechanisms in grasping. Neuropsychologia, 47(6), 1532–1545.CrossRefPubMed

Hu, Y., & Goodale, M. A. (2000). Grasping after a delay shifts size-scaling from absolute to relative metrics. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(5), 856–868.CrossRefPubMed

Jeannerod, M. (1988). The neural and behavioural organization of goal-directed movements (Vol. xii). New York: Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press.

Jeannerod, M., Arbib, M. A., Rizzolatti, G., & Sakata, H. (1995). Grasping objects: The cortical mechanisms of visuomotor transformation. Trends in Neurosciences, 18(7), 314–320.CrossRefPubMed

Kadosh, R. C., Henik, A., Rubinsten, O., Mohr, H., Dori, H., van de Ven, V., et al. (2005). Are numbers special?: The comparison systems of the human brain investigated by fMRI. Neuropsychologia, 43(9), 1238–1248.CrossRef

Lindemann, O., Abolafia, J. M., Girardi, G., & Bekkering, H. (2007). Getting a grip on numbers: numerical magnitude priming in object grasping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(6), 1400.PubMed

Moretto, G., & Pellegrino, G. di (2008). Grasping numbers. Experimental Brain Research, 188(4), 505–515.CrossRefPubMed

Namdar, G., & Ganel, T. (2015). Cross-modal effects of auditory magnitude on visually guided grasping. Journal of Vision, 15(8), 2–2.CrossRefPubMed

Namdar, G., Tzelgov, J., Algom, D., & Ganel, T. (2014). Grasping numbers: evidence for automatic influence of numerical magnitude on grip aperture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(3), 830–835.CrossRef

Rinaldi, L., Lega, C., Cattaneo, Z., Girelli, L., & Bernardi, N. F. (2016). Grasping the sound: Auditory pitch influences size processing in motor planning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(1), 11–22.PubMed

Seegelke, C., Güldenpenning, I., Dettling, J., & Schack, T. (2016). Visuomotor priming of action preparation and motor programming is similar in visually guided and memory-guided actions. Neuropsychologia.

Walsh, V. (2003). A theory of magnitude: common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(11), 483–488.CrossRefPubMed

Westwood, D. A., & Goodale, M. A. (2003). A haptic size-contrast illusion affects size perception but not grasping. Experimental Brain Research, 153(2), 253–259.CrossRefPubMed

Westwood, D. A., Heath, M., & Roy, E. A. (2000). The effect of a pictorial illusion on closed-loop and open-loop prehension. Experimental Brain Research, 134(4), 456–463.CrossRefPubMed

Westwood, D. A., Heath, M., & Roy, E. A. (2003). No evidence for accurate visuomotor memory: Systematic and variable error in memory-guided reaching. Journal of Motor Behavior, 35(2), 127–133.CrossRefPubMed

Westwood, D. A., McEachern, T., & Roy, E. A. (2001). Delayed grasping of a Müller-Lyer figure. Experimental Brain Research, 141(2), 166–173.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Numerical magnitude affects online execution, and not planning of visuomotor control
Auteurs: Gal Namdar
Tzvi Ganel
Publicatiedatum: 20-01-2017
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 3/2018
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-016-0837-3

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2018

Delta plots with negative-going slopes as a potential marker of decreasing response activation in masked semantic priming

Training working memory updating in young adults

The limits of boundaries: unpacking localization and cognitive mapping relative to a boundary

Relatedness support enhances motor learning

Did I see your hand moving? The effect of movement-related information on the Corsi block tapping task

Evidence for instructions-based updating of task-set representations: the informed fadeout effect