Interrupted object-based updating of reach program leads to a negative compatibility effect

Journal of Motor Behavior

Volumn 41, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 305-316

  Vainio, Lari ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

Inhibition; Motor control; Reach execution; S R Compatibility

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MOTOR CONTROL; MOTOR NERVE CONDUCTION; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL INFORMATION;

EID: 67650333618     PISSN: 00222895     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/JMBR.41.4.305-316     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Arbib, M. A. (1981). Perceptual structures and distributed motor control. In V. B. Brooks (Ed.), Motor control (Vol. 2, pp. 1449-1480). Baltimore: William & Wilkins.
2. Boy, F., Clarke, K., & Sumner, P. (2008). Mask stimulus triggers inhibition in subliminal visuomotor priming. Experimental Brain Research, 190, 111-116.
3. Castiello, U., Bennett, K. M., & Chambers, H. (1998). Reach to grasp: The response to a simultaneous perturbation of object position and size. Experimental Brain Research, 120, 31-40.
4. Castiello, U., Bennett, K. M., & Stelmach, G. E. (1993). Reach to grasp: The natural response to perturbation of object size. Experimental Brain Research, 94, 163-178.
5. Chao, L. L., & Martin, A. (2000). Representation of manipu-lable manmade objects in the dorsal stream. NeuroImage, 12, 478-484.
6. Craighero, L., Fadiga, L., Umiltà, C. A., & Rizzolatti, G. (1996). Evidence for visuomotor priming effect. NeuroReport, 8, 347-349.
7. Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (1998). Effects of masked stimuli on motor activation: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1737-1747.
8. Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (2001). Response facilitation and inhibition in manual, vocal, and oculomotor performance: Evidence for a modality-unspecific mechanism. Journal of Motor Behavior, 33, 16-26.
9. Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (2002). Links between conscious awareness and response inhibition: Evidence from masked priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 514-520.
10. Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (2000). Microaffordance: The potentiation of components of action by seen objects. British Journal of Psychology, 91, 451-471.
11. Ellis, R., Tucker, M., Symes, E., & Vainio, L. (2007). Does selecting one visual object from several require inhibition of the actions associated with nonselected objects? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 670-691.
12. Faillenot, I., Toni, I., Decety, J., Gregoire, M. C., & Jeannerod, M. (1997). Visual pathways for object-oriented action and object recognition: Functional anatomy with PET. Cerebral Cortex, 7, 77-85.
13. Fischer, M. H., & Adam, J. J. (2001). Distractor effects on pointing: The role of spatial layout. Experimental Brain Research, 136, 507-513.
14. Fischer, M. H., & Dahl, C. (2007). The time course of visuomotor affordances. Experimental Brain Research, 176, 519-524.
15. Gentilucci, M., Daprati, E., Toni, I., Chieffi, S., & Saetti, M. C. (1995). Unconscious updating of grasp motor program. Experimental Brain Research, 105, 291-303.
16. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
17. Glover, S. R. (2004). Separate representations in the planning and control of action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 3-24.
18. 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.
19. Goodale, M. A., Pelisson, D., & Prablanc, C. (1986, April 24). Large adjustments in visually guided reaching do not depend on vision of the hand or perception of target displacement. Nature, 320, 748-750.
20. Grafton, S. T., Fadiga, L., Arbib, M. A., & Rizzolatti, G. (1997). Premotor cortex activation during observation and naming of familiar tools. NeuroImage, 6, 231-236.
21. Grezes, J., Armony, J. L., Rowe, J., & Passingham, R. E. (2003). Activations related to "mirror" and "canonical" neurons in the human brain: An fMRI study. NeuroImage, 18, 928-937.
22. Grezes, J., & Decety, J. (2002). Does visual perception of object afford action? Evidence from a neuroimaging study. Neuropsychologia, 40, 212-222.
23. Handy, T. C., Grafton, S. T., Shroff, N. M., Ketay, S., & Gazzaniga, M. S. (2003). Graspable objects grasp attention when the potential for action is recognized. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 421-427.
24. Jaskowski, P. (2008). The negative compatibility effect with non-masking flankers: A case for mask-triggered inhibition hypothesis. Consciousness and Cognition, 17, 765-777.
25. Jaśkowski, P., & Przekoracka-Krawczyk, A. (2005). On the role of mask structure in subliminal priming. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, 65, 409-417.
26. Jeannerod, M. (1988). The neural and behavioural organization of goal-directed movements. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
27. Jeannerod, M. (1997). The cognitive neuroscience of action. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
28. Jeannerod, M. (2001). Neural simulation of action: A unifying mechanism for motor cognition. NeuroImage, 14, 103-109.
29. Klapp, S. T. (2005). Two versions of the negative compatibility effect: A reply to Lleras and Enns (2004). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 431-435.
30. Klapp, S. T., & Hinkley, L. B. (2002). The negative compatibility effect: Unconscious inhibition influences reaction time and response selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 255-269.
31. Lleras, A., & Enns, J. T. (2004). Negative compatibility or object updating? A cautionary tale of mask-dependent priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 475-493.
32. Martin, A., Wiggs, C. L., Ungerleider, L. G., & Haxby, J. V. (1996, February 15). Neural correlates of category-specific knowledge. Nature, 379, 649-652.
33. Mattler, U. (2005). Inhibition and decay of motor and nonmotor priming. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 285-300.
34. Mieschke, P. E., Elliott, D., Helsen, W. F., Carson, R. G., & Coull, J. A. (2001). Manual asymmetries in the preparation and control of goal-directed movements. Brain and Cognition, 45, 129-140.
35. Paulignan, Y., Jeannerod, M., MacKenzie, C., & Marteniuk, R. (1991). Selective perturbation of visual input during prehension movements: Part 2. The effects of changing object size. Experimental Brain Research, 87, 407-420.
36. Pavese, A., & Buxbaum, L. J. (2002). Action matters: The role of action plans and object affordances in selection for action. Visual Cognition, 9, 559-550.
37. Phillips, J., & Ward, R. (2002). S-R compatibility effects of irrelevant visual affordance: Time course and specificity of response activation. Visual Cognition, 9, 540-558.
38. Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 2-25.
39. Prablanc, C., & Martin, O. (1992). Automatic control during hand reaching at undetected two-dimensional target displacements. Journal of Neurophysiology, 67, 455-469.
40. Rice, N. J., Valyear, K. F., Goodale, M. A., Milner, A. D., & Cul-ham, J. C. (2007). Orientation sensitivity to graspable objects: An fMRI adaptation study. NeuroImage, 36, 87-93.
41. Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2006). Active masks and active inhibition: A comment on Lleras and Enns (2004) and on Verleger, Jaśkowski, Aydemir, van der Lubbe, and Groen (2004). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 484-494.
42. Simon, J. R., & Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S - R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300-304.
43. Sumner, P. (2007). Negative and positive masked-priming implications for motor inhibition. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3, 317-326.
44. Sumner, P. (2008). Mask-induced priming and the negative compatibility effect. Experimental Psychology, 55, 133-141.
45. Sumner, P., Tsai, P.-C., Yu, K., & Nachev, P. (2006). Attentional modulation of sensorimotor processes in the absence of perceptual awareness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA, 103, 10520-10525.
46. Tipper, S. P., Howard, L. A., & Jackson, S. R. (1997). Selective reaching to grasp: Evidence for distractor interference effects. Visual Cognition, 4, 1-38.
47. Tipper, S. P., Lortie, C., & Baylis, G. C. (1992). Selective reaching: Evidence for action-centered attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 891-905.
48. Tipper, S. P. , Paul, M., & Hayes, A. (2006). Vision-for-action: The effects of object property discrimination and action state on affordance compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 493-498.
49. Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (1998). On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 830-846.
50. Valyear, K. F., Culham, J. C., Sharif, N., Westwood, D., & Goodale, M. A. (2006). A double dissociation between sensitivity to changes in object identity and object orientation in the ventral and dorsal visual streams: A human fMRI study. Neuropsychologia, 44, 218-228.