Bimanual cross-talk during reaching movements is primarily related to response selection, not the specification of motor parameters

Psychological Research

Volumn 67, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 56-70

  Hazeltine, Eliot ^a   Diedrichsen, Joern ^b   Kennerley, Steven W ^b   Ivry, Richard B ^b  

^a NASA AMES RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REACTION TIME; RESPONSE TIME; SYMBOLISM;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CUES; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MOVEMENT; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; REFRACTORY PERIOD, PSYCHOLOGICAL; SYMBOLISM;

EID: 0038530785     PISSN: 03400727     EISSN: 14302772     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-002-0119-0     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Allport, A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and Performance (Vol. XV, pp. 421-452). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2. Carey, D. P. (2001). Do action systems resist visual illusions? Trends in Cognitive Science, 5, 109-113.
3. De Jong, R. (1993). Multiple bottlenecks in overlapping task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 965-980.
4. De Jong, R. (1994). Conditional and unconditional automaticity: A dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 731-750.
5. Diedrichsen, J., Hazeltine, E., Kennerley, S., & Ivry, R. B. (2001). Absence of bimanual interference during directly cued actions. Psychological Science, 12, 493-498.
6. Diedrichsen, J., Ivry, R. B., Hazeltine, E., Kennerley, S., & Cohen, A. (in press). Bimanual interference associated with the selection of target locations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.
7. Elsner, B., & Hommel, B. (2001). Effect anticipation and action control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 229-240.
8. Franz, E. A., Eliassen, J. C., Ivry, R. B., & Gazzaniga, M. S. (1996). Dissociation of spatial and temporal coupling in the bimanual movements of callosotomy patients. Psychological Science, 7, 306-310.
9. Franz, E. A., Zelaznik, H. N., & McCabe, G. (1991). Spatial topological constraints in a bimanual task. Acta Psychologia, 77, 137-151.
10. Franz, E. A., Zelaznik, H. N., Swinnen, S., & Walter, C. B. (2001). Spatial conceptual influence on the coordination of bimanual actions: when a dual task becomes a single task. Journal of Motor Behavior, 33, 103-112.
11. Goodman, D., & Kelso, J. A. (1980). Are movements prepared in parts? Not under compatible (naturalized) conditions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 475-495.
12. Greenwald, A. G., & Shulman, H. G. (1973). On doing two things at once: II. Elimination of the psychological refractory period effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 101, 70-76.
13. Haffenden, A. M., & Goodale, M. A. (1998). The effect of pictorial illusion on prehension and perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 122-136.
14. Hazeltine, E. (2002). The representational nature of sequence learning: Evidence for goal-based codes. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Attention and Performance (Vol. XIX, pp. 673-689). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Heuer, H. (1995). Models for response-response compatibility: The effects of the relation between responses in a choice task. Acta Psychologia, 90, 315-332.
16. Hommel, B. (1993). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent effects of irrelevant spatial information. Psychological Research, 55, 270-279.
17. Hommel, B. (1997). Interactions between stimulus-stimulus congruence and stimulus-response compatibility. Psychological Research, 59, 248-260.
18. Hommel, B. (1998). Automatic stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1368-1384.
19. Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC). Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24.
20. Hommel, B., & Prinz, W. (1997). Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility (Vol. 119). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
21. Ivry, R. B., Franz, E. A., Kingstone, A., & Johnston, J. C. (1998). The psychological refractory period effect following callosotomy: uncoupling of lateralized response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 463-480.
22. Kornblum, S. (1992). Dimensional overlap and dimensional relevance in stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility. In G. E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Tutorials in motor behavior (Vol. II, pp. 743-777). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
23. Kornblum, S. (1994). The way irrelevant dimensions are processed depends on what they overlap with: The case of Stroop- and Simon-like stimuli. Psychological Research, 56, 130-135.
24. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility - A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
25. Lien, M.-C., & Proctor, R. W. (2000). Multiple spatial correspondence effects on dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1260-1280.
26. Lien, M.-C., Proctor, R. W., & Allen, P. A. (2002). Ideomotor compatibility in the Psychological Refractory Period Effect: Twenty-eight years of oversimplification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 396-409.
27. Logan, G. D., & Schulkind, M. D. (2000), Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task-situations: I. Semantic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1072-1090.
28. Mayr, U., & Kliegl, R. (2000). Task-set switching and long-term memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1124-1140.
29. McCann, R. S., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Locus of the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 471-484.
30. Mechsner, F., Kerzel, D., Knoblich, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). Perceptual basis of bimanual coordination. Nature, 414, 69-73.
31. Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1997). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory phenomena. Psychological Review, 107, 749-791.
32. Milner, A. D., & Goodale, M. A. (1995). The visual brain in action. New York: Oxford University Press.
33. Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
34. Pashler, H., & Baylis, G. (1991). Procedural learning: 2. Intertrial repetition effects in speeded-choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 17, 33-48.
35. Proctor, R. W., & Reeve, G. T. (1990). Research on stimulus-response compatibility: Toward a comprehensive account. In R. W. Proctor & G. T. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (Vol. 65). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
36. Ridderinkoff, K. R. (2002). Activation and suppression in conflict tasks: Empirical clarification through distributional analyses. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Attention and Performance (Vol. XIX, pp. 494-519). Oxford: University Press.
37. Rogers, R., & Monsell, S. (1995). The costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 124, 207-231.
38. Spijkers, W., Heuer, H., Steglich, C., & Kleinsorge, T. (1997). Preparation of bimanual movements with same and different amplitudes: Specification interference as revealed by reaction time. Acta Psychologia, 96, 207-227.
39. Spijkers, W., Heuer, H., Steglich, C., & Kleinsorge, T. (2000). Specification of movement amplitude for the left and right hands: Evidence for transient parametric coupling from overlapping-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1091-1105.
40. Stoet, G., & Hommel, B. (1999). Action planning and the temporal binding of response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1625-1640.
41. Ziessler, M., & Nattkemper, D. (2002). Effect anticipation in action planning. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Attention and Performance (Vol. XIX, pp. 645-672). Oxford: University Press.