Age Effects on Controlling Tools with Sensorimotor Transformations

Abstract

Controlling tools in technical environments bears a lot of challenges for the human information processing system, as locations of tool manipulation and effect appearance are spatially separated, and distal action effects are often not generated in a 1:1 manner. In this study we investigated the susceptibility of older adults to distal action effects. Younger and older participants performed a Fitts’ task on a digitizer tablet without seeing their hand and the tablet directly. Visual feedback was presented on a display in that way, that cursor amplitude and visual target size varied while the pre-determined hand amplitude remained constant. In accordance with distal action effects being predominant in controlling tool actions we found an increase in hand movement times and perceptual errors as a function of visual task characteristics. Middle-aged adults more intensely relied on visual feedback than younger adults. Age-related differences in speed-accuracy trade-off are not likely to account for this finding. However, it is well known that proprioceptive acuity declines with age. This might be one reason for middle-aged adults to stronger rely on the visual information instead of the proprioceptive information. Consequently, design and application of tools for elderly should account for this.

Spatial representations in older adults are not modified by action: Evidence from tool use.

“…In short, the normal aging process may yield apraxia-like deficits specific for tool use (Mizelle & Wheaton, 2010). Recent work measuring hand movements during tool use supports this possibility, with older adults demonstrating altered grip preparations when reaching for tools (Cacola, Martinez, & Ray, 2012;Rand & Heuer, 2013;Sutter, Ladwig, Oehl, & Musseler, 2012). Age-related deficits in tool use may reflect changes in brain regions involved in tool-based distance perception.…”

Characteristics of older adults that predict performance in building robotic kits

“…As higher contrast sensitivity was the main predictor of task engagement, visual ability had some effect on the mental focus allotted to the task at hand. Sutter, Ladwig, Oehl & Müsseler (2012) previously determined that older adults relied more on visual ability than proprioceptive feedback in the completion of motor tasks. The importance of visual ability in engagement may be reflected in this finding.…”

Editorial: Action effects in perception and action

“…Otherwise the impressive range of topics that have come together in the present research topic can hardly be explained. These topics range from investigations of how attention and perception are modulated by intentions and expectations (Kemper et al, 2012; Wykowska and Schubö, 2012), to applied settings such as aging and tool-use (Sutter et al, 2012), task-switching (Lukas et al, 2013), to social influences on action coding (Colzato et al, 2012; Nishimura and Michimata, 2013) and a developmental perspective on action effects in object manipulation (Knudsen et al, 2012). These new perspectives are backed up by studies on two prevailing questions in ideomotor research: The formation of action-effect associations (Herwig and Waszak, 2012; Janczyk et al, 2012; Ruge et al, 2012)—including a first step toward addressing individual differences in ideomotor learning (Muhle-Karbe and Krebs, 2012)—and the role of such associations for action control (Gaschler and Nattkemper, 2012; Walter and Rieger, 2012; Ziessler et al, 2012).…”