Development of multiple movement representations with practice: Specificity versus flexibility

Journal of Motor Behavior

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 243-254

  Soucy, Marle Christine ^a   Proteau, Luc ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Manual aiming; Motor control; Motor learning; Specificity of practice hypothesis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEARNING; MOTOR CONTROL; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; NORMAL HUMAN; TASK PERFORMANCE; TIME; VISION;

EID: 0034910127     PISSN: 00222895     EISSN: 19401027     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00222890109601910     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Cole, J. D., & Sedgwick, E. M. (1992). The perceptions of force and of movement in a man without large myelinated sensory afferents below the neck. Journal of Physiology, 449, 503-515.
2. Fitts, P. M. (1954). The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 381-391.
3. Gibson, E. J. (1969). Principles of perceptual learning and development. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
4. Golilberger, M. E. (1977). Locomotor recovery after unilateral hindlimb deafferentation in cats. Brain Research, 123, 59-74.
5. Henry, F. M. (1975). Absolute error versus "E., in target accuracy. Journal of Motor Behavior, 7, 227-228.
6. Jeannerod, M. (1988). The neural and behavioral organization of goal-directed movement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. Kecle, S. W. (1968). Movement control in skilled motor performance. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 387-403.
8. Lashley, K. S. (1917). The accuracy of movement in the absence of excitation from the moving organ. The American Journal of Physiology, 43, 169-194.
9. Polit, A., & Bizzi, E. (1978). Processes controlling arm movements in monkeys. Science, 201, 1235-1237.
10. Proteau, L. (1992). On the specificity of learning and the role of visual information for movement control. In L. Proteau & D. Elliott (Eds.), Vision and motor control (pp. 67-103). Amsterdam: North Holland.
11. Proteau, L., Marteniuk, R. G., Girouard, Y., & Dugas, C. (1987). On the type of information used to control and learn an aiming movement after moderate and extensive training. Human Movement Science, 6, 181-199.
12. Proteau, L., Marteniuk, R. G., & Ldvesque, L. (1992). A sensorimotor basis for motor learning: Evidence indicating specificity of practice. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44A, 557-575.
13. Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological Review, 82, 225-260.
14. Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (1999). Motor control and learning (3rd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
15. Soechting, J. F., & Flanders, M. (1989a). Errors in pointing are due to approximations in sensorimotor transformations. Journal of Neurophysiology, 62, 595-608.
16. Soechting, J. F., & Flanders, M. (1989b). Sensorimotor representations for pointing to targets in three-dimensional space. Journal of Neurophysiology, 62, 582-594.
17. Tremblay, L., & Proteau, L. (1998). Specificity of practice: The case of powerlifting. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 69, 284-289.
18. Tremblay, L., & Proteau, L. (in press). Specificity of practice in a ball interception task. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology.
19. Whiting, H. T. A., & Savelsbergh, G. J. P. (1992). An exception that proves the rule! In G. E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Turorials in motor behavior 2 (pp. 583-597). Amsterdam: North Holland.
20. Whiting, H. T. A., Savelsbergh, G. J. P., & Pijpers, J. R. (1995). Specificity of motor learning does not deny flexibility. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 44, 315-332.