Top

Gepubliceerd in:

04-04-2021 | Original Article

The influence of object size on second-order planning in an overturned cup task

Auteur: Sara M. Scharoun Benson

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 2/2022

Abstract

For children, second-order planning in object manipulation, as demonstrated by the end-state comfort (ESC) effect, is constrained by numerous factors. As a step towards delineating the influence of object size, children (ages 6–10, n = 113) and adults (ages 18–25, n = 17) performed an overturned cup task with 8 cup sizes (4.7–8.4 cm diameter). Contrary to the hypothesis, cup size did not predict the overall proportion of trials with ESC. An increase in age and hand length did result in more ESC. Subsequent analyses with children, which focused on each cup size, revealed an increase in the ratio of hand size to cup size resulted in an increase in ESC with the 4.7, 5.2, 6.2, and 6.7 cm cups, age was a significant predictor with 4.7, 5.2, and 6.2 cm cups, and the interaction was significant for the 6.2 cm cup. No other significant results emerged. Together, findings offer preliminary support for the notion that object size does constrain children’s motor planning skills to a certain degree (i.e., with large cups); however, further inquiry is warranted to elucidate the link between object size and hand size in children’s performance of tasks requiring second-order planning.

vorige artikel Partial repetition between action plans delays responses to ideomotor compatible stimuli

volgende artikel What am I doing? It depends: agency and action identification

Adalbjornsson, C. F., Fischman, M. G., & Rudisill, M. E. (2008). The end-state comfort effect in young children. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 79(1), 36–41.PubMedCrossRef

Agarwal, P., & Sahu, S. (2010). Determination of hand and palm area as a ratio of body surface area in Indian population. Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery: Official Publication of the Association of Plastic Surgeons of India, 43(1), 49.CrossRef

Amirsheybani, H. R., Crecelius, G. M., Timothy, N. H., Pfeiffer, M., Saggers, G. C., & Manders, E. K. (2001). The natural history of the growth of the hand: I. Hand area as a percentage of body surface area. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 107(3), 726–733.PubMedCrossRef

Bernstein, N. (1967). The Coordination and Regulation of Movements. . Pergamon Press.

Bongers, R. M., Smitsman, A. W., & Michaels, C. F. (2004). Geometric, but not kinetic, properties of tools affect the affordances perceived by toddlers. Ecological Psychology, 16(2), 129–158.CrossRef

Buszard, T., Reid, M., Masters, R., & Farrow, D. (2016). Scaling the equipment and play area in children’s sport to improve motor skill acquisition: A systematic review. Sports medicine, 46(6), 829–843.PubMedCrossRef

Coelho, C. J., Studenka, B. E., & Rosenbaum, D. A. (2014). End-state comfort trumps handedness in object manipulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(2), 718.PubMed

Corradini, M. L., Gentilucci, M., Leo, T., & Rizzolatti, G. (1992). Motor control of voluntary arm movements. Biological cybernetics, 67(4), 347–360.PubMedCrossRef

Domellöf, E., Bäckström, A., Johansson, A. M., Rönnqvist, L., von Hofsten, C., & Rosander, K. (2019). Kinematic characteristics of second-order motor planning and performance in 6-and 10-year-old children and adults: Effects of age and task constraints. Developmental Psychobiology, 62(2), 250–265.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (2000). Micro-affordance: The potentiation of components of action by seen objects. British journal of psychology, 91(4), 451–471.PubMedCrossRef

Gerson, S. A., Bekkering, H., & Hunnius, S. (2016). Social context influences planning ahead in three-year-olds. Cognitive Development, 40, 120–131.CrossRef

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. . Houghton Mifflin.

Gibson, E. J., & Pick, A. D. (2000). An ecological approach to perceptual learning and development. . Oxford University Press.

Gonzalez, D. A., Studenka, B. E., Glazebrook, C. M., & Lyons, J. L. (2011). Extending end-state comfort effect: Do we consider the beginning state comfort of another? Acta psychologica, 136(3), 347–353.PubMedCrossRef

Herbort, O., & Butz, M. V. (2011). Habitual and goal-directed factors in (everyday) object handling. Experimental Brain Research, 213(4), 371.PubMedCrossRef

Herbort, O., Büschelberger, J., & Janczyk, M. (2018). Preschool children adapt grasping movements to upcoming object manipulations: Evidence from a dial rotation task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 167, 62–77.PubMedCrossRef

Herbort, O., Koning, A., van Uem, J., & Meulenbroek, R. G. (2012). The end-state comfort effect facilitates joint action. Acta Psychologica, 139(3), 404–416.PubMedCrossRef

Huang, H. H., Ellis, T. D., Wagenaar, R. C., & Fetters, L. (2013). The impact of body-scaled information on reaching. Physical Therapy, 93(1), 41–49.PubMedCrossRef

Jax, S. A., Rosenbaum, D. A., Vaughan, J., & Meulenbroek, R. G. J. (2003). Computational motor control and human factors: Modeling movements in real and possible environments. Human Factors, 45, 5–27.PubMedCrossRef

Jeannerod, M. (1984). The timing of natural prehension movements. Journal of motor behavior, 16(3), 235–254.PubMedCrossRef

Knudsen, B., Henning, A., Wunsch, K., Weigelt, M., & Aschersleben, G. (2012). The end-state comfort effect in 3-to 8-year-old children in two object manipulation tasks. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 445.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Lindemann, O., Stenneken, P., Van Schie, H. T., & Bekkering, H. (2006). Semantic activation in action planning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(3), 633.PubMed

Lopresti-Goodman, S. M., Turvey, M. T., & Frank, T. D. (2011). Behavioral dynamics of the affordance “graspable.” Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73(6), 1948–1965.CrossRef

Manoel, E. J., & Moreira, C. R. P. (2005). Planning manipulative hand movements: Do young children show the endstate comfort effect? Journal of Human Movement Studies, 49, 93–114.

Mason, A. H., Bruyn, J. L., & Lazarus, J. A. C. (2013). Bimanual coordination in children: Manipulation of object distance. Experimental Brain Research, 231(2), 153–164.PubMedCrossRef

McCarty, M. E., Clifton, R. K., & Collard, R. R. (1999). Problem solving in infancy: The emergence of an action plan. Developmental Psychology, 35(4), 1091–1101.PubMedCrossRef

Meyer, M., Van Der Wel, R. P., & Hunnius, S. (2013). Higher-order action planning for individual and joint object manipulations. Experimental brain research, 225(4), 579–588.PubMedCrossRef

Meyer, M., van der Wel, R. P., & Hunnius, S. (2016). Planning my actions to accommodate yours: joint action development during early childhood. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 371(1693), 20150371.CrossRef

Newell, K. M., Scully, D. M., Tenenbaum, F., & Hardiman, S. (1989). Body scale and the development of prehension. Developmental Psychobiology: The Journal of the International Society for Developmental Psychobiology, 22(1), 1–13.CrossRef

Newell, K. M., & Wade, M. G. (2018). Physical growth, body scale, and perceptual-motor development. In J. Plumert (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 55, pp. 205–243). JAI.

Ray, M., & Welsh, T. N. (2011). Response selection during a joint action task. Journal of Motor Behavior, 43(4), 329–332.PubMedCrossRef

Rosenbaum, D. A., Chapman, K. M., Coelho, C. J., Gong, L., & Studenka, B. E. (2013). Choosing actions. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 273.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Rosenbaum, D. A., Cohen, R. G., Dawson, A. M., Jax, S. A., Meulenbroek, R. G., Van Der Wel, R., & Vaughan, J. (2009). The posture-based motion planning framework: new findings related to object manipulation, moving around obstacles, moving in three spatial dimensions, and haptic tracking. In D. Sternad (Ed.), Progress in Motor Control (pp. 485–497). Springer, Boston, MA.

Rosenbaum, D. A., Chapman, K. M., Weigelt, M., Weiss, D. J., & van der Wel, R. (2012). Cognition, action, and object manipulation. Psychological Bulletin, 138(5), 924.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Rosenbaum, D. A., Herbort, O., Van der Wel, R., & Weiss, D. J. (2014). What’s in a grasp. American Scientist, 102, 366–373.CrossRef

Rosenbaum, D. A., Marchak, F., Barnes, H. J., Vaughan, J., Slotta, J. D., & Jorgensen, M. J. (1990). Constraints for action selection: Overhand versus underhand grip. In M. Jeannerod (Ed.), Attention and performance XIII. (pp. 321–342). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Rosenbaum, D. A., Meulenbroek, R. G. J., Vaughan, J., & Jansen, C. (2001). Posture-based motion planning: Applications to grasping. Psychological Review, 108, 709–734.PubMedCrossRef

Sacheli, L. M., Arcangeli, E., & Paulesu, E. (2018). Evidence for a dyadic motor plan in joint action. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1–12.CrossRef

Satta, E., Ferrari-Toniolo, S., Visco-Comandini, F., Caminiti, R., & Battaglia-Mayer, A. (2017). Development of motor coordination during joint action in mid-childhood. Neuropsychologia, 105, 111–122.PubMedCrossRef

Scharoun Benson, S. M., Bryden, P. J., & Roy, E. A. (2019). Age-group differences in beginning-state comfort reveal an increase in motor planning capabilities. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 43(6), 563–568.CrossRef

Scharoun Benson, S. M., Roy, E. A., & Bryden, P. J. (2018). End-state comfort in two object manipulation tasks: Investigating how the movement context influences planning in children, young adults, and older adults. Developmental Psychobiology, 60(3), 317–323.PubMedCrossRef

Scharoun, S. M., & Bryden, P. J. (2014a). The development of end-and beginning-state comfort in a cup manipulation task. Developmental Psychobiology, 56(3), 407–420.PubMedCrossRef

Scharoun, S. M., & Bryden, P. J. (2014b). Hand preference, performance abilities, and hand selection in children. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 82.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Scharoun, S. M., Bryden, P. J., Cinelli, M. E., Gonzalez, D. A., & Roy, E. A. (2016a). Do children have the same capacity to perceive affordances as adults? An investigation of tool selection and use. Journal of Motor Learning and Development, 4, 59–79.CrossRef

Scharoun, S. M., Gonzalez, D. A., Roy, E. A., & Bryden, P. J. (2016b). How the mode of action affects evidence of planning and movement kinematics in aging: End-state comfort in older adults. Developmental Psychobiology, 58(4), 439–449.PubMedCrossRef

Scharoun, S., Mintz, A., Glazebrook, C. M., Roy, E., & Gonzalez, D. (2017). How working with a helpful versus less helpful confederate influences joint-action in a pegboard task. Journal of Motor Behavior, 49(6), 619–628.PubMedCrossRef

Scharoun, S. M., Gonzalez, D. A., Roy, E. A., & Bryden, P. J. (2018a). End-state comfort across the lifespan: A cross-sectional investigation of how movement context influences motor planning in an overturned glass task. Motor Control, 22(2), 211–230.PubMedCrossRef

Scharoun, S. M., Robinson, L. E., Logan, S. W., Bryden, P. J., Brock, S. J., & Fischman, M. G. (2018b). Sex differences in the end-state comfort effect in pre-adolescent children. Human movement science, 57, 244–250.PubMedCrossRef

Sebanz, N., Bekkering, H., & Knoblich, G. (2006). Joint action: bodies and minds moving together. Trends in cognitive sciences, 10(2), 70–76.PubMedCrossRef

Steenbergen, B., Van der Kamp, J., Smithsman, A. W., & Carson, R. G. (1997). Spoon handling in two-to-four-year-old children. Ecological Psychology, 9(2), 113–129.CrossRef

Stöckel, T., Wunsch, K., & Hughes, C. M. (2017). Age-related decline in anticipatory motor planning and its relation to cognitive and motor skill proficiency. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 9, 283.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Thibaut, J. P., & Toussaint, L. (2010). Developing motor planning over ages. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 105(1–2), 116–129.PubMedCrossRef

van der Kamp, J., Savelsbergh, G. J., & Davis, W. E. (1998). Body-scaled ratio as a control parameter for prehension in 5-to 9-year-old children. Developmental Psychobiology: The Journal of the International Society for Developmental Psychobiology, 33(4), 351–361.CrossRef

van Elk, M., van Schie, H., & Bekkering, H. (2014). Action semantics: A unifying conceptual framework for the selective use of multimodal and modality-specific object knowledge. Physics of life reviews, 11(2), 220–250.PubMedCrossRef

van Swieten, L. M., van Bergen, E., Williams, J. H., Wilson, A. D., Plumb, M. S., Kent, S. W., et al. (2010). A test of motor (not executive) planning in developmental coordination disorder and autism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(2), 493.PubMed

Wang, S., Williams, J., & Wilmut, K. (2019). Constraints on motor planning across the life span: Physical, cognitive, and motor factors. Psychology and Aging, 35(3), 421–433.PubMedCrossRef

Weigelt, M. (2018). The development of anticipatory planning skills in 3-to 12-year-old children. In D. Corbetta & M. Santello (Eds.), Reach-to-Grasp behavior: Brain, behavior, and modelling across the life span. Ch. 4. Routledge.

Weigelt, M., & Schack, T. (2010). The development of end-state comfort planning in preschool children. Experimental Psychology., 57, 476–482.PubMedCrossRef

Wunsch, K., & Weigelt, M. (2016). A three-stage model for the acquisition of anticipatory planning skills for grip selection during object manipulation in young children. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 958.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Wunsch, K., Henning, A., Aschersleben, G., & Weigelt, M. (2013). A systematic review of the end-state comfort effect in normally developing children and in children with developmental disorders. Journal of Motor Learning and Development, 1(3), 59–76.CrossRef

Wunsch, K., Weiss, D. J., Schack, T., & Weigelt, M. (2015). Second-order motor planning in children: Insights from a cup-manipulation-task. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 79(4), 669–677.PubMedCrossRef

Wunsch, K., Weigelt, M., & Stöckel, T. (2017). Anticipatory motor planning in older adults. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 72(3), 373–382.

Titel: The influence of object size on second-order planning in an overturned cup task
Auteur: Sara M. Scharoun Benson
Publicatiedatum: 04-04-2021
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 2/2022
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01509-2

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2022

Cognitively demanding stimuli can acquire positive valence

Original Article

Effects of temporal order and intentionality on reflective attention to words in noise

Original Article

What factors underlie our experience of the passage of time? Theoretical consequences

Original Article

The role of working memory for task-order coordination in dual-task situations

Open Access
Original Article

Partial repetition between action plans delays responses to ideomotor compatible stimuli

Original Article

Emotional mental imagery generation during spontaneous future thinking: relationship with optimism and negative mood

Original Article