Frequency-induced changes in interlimb interactions: Increasing manifestations of closed-loop control

Boer, Betteco J. de; Peper, C. E.; Beek, Peter J.

doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2011.01.057

Cited by 9 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it is not known whether performance at these lower frequencies, or at frequencies above 2 Hz would show results similar to those of our study. Indeed, it has been proposed that the control strategy for bimanual coordinated movement in the horizontal plane changes depending on movement frequency (1 Hz to 3.5 Hz) (de Boer et al 2011). Therefore, an investigation of the frequency dependence of the combination effect in the passive condition will be needed if conclusions of this study are to be generalized across viable frequencies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In accordance with previous studies, we utilized the passive condition in which subjects had to move one limb with the use of kinesthetic tracking (closed-loop control) to follow the passive movements of another limb. The methodology we utilized is well established and has been utilized by a number of investigators to analyze the contribution of the projections of efferent or afferent signals, and interactions between them especially in twolimb coordination task (Stinear and Byblow 2001;Ridderikhoff et al 2005;de Boer et al 2011de Boer et al , 2012Nakagawa et al 2013). If the responses of the active and passive conditions differ, the control strategy of the active condition would not solely depend on closed-loop control, and other mechanisms of necessity would be involved.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Potential explanation of limb combination performance differences for two-limb coordination tasks

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rhythmic two-limb coordinated movements in the sagittal plane are variable and inaccurate when the movements are in the opposite direction as compared with those in the same direction (directional constraint). The magnitude of directional constraint depends on the particular limb combination. It is prominent in ipsilateral hand-foot coordination, but minimal in bimanual hand coordination. The reason for such differences remains unclear. In this study, we investigated the possible mechanisms underlying the production of the difference that depend on limb combination. Subjects performed two-limb rhythmic coordinated movements either in the same or in the opposite direction for three separate limb combinations (bilateral hands, contralateral hand and foot, and ipsilateral hand and foot). For each combination two different tasks were performed. In the first condition, subjects actively moved two limbs (active condition). Second, subjects actively moved one limb in coordination with a passively moved limb (passive condition). In the active condition, the directional constraint was dependent upon the limb combination, as reported in previous studies; the directional constraint was quite prominent in ipsilateral combinations, intermediate in contralateral combinations, and minimal for bilateral combination. However, differences in the directional constraint did not depend on limb combination for any combination in the passive conditions which apparently utilized closed-loop control. In other word, the difference depending on limb combination disappeared when control strategies become uniformly closed-loop. Thus, we speculate that the control strategy utilized depends on limb combination in the active condition. Additionally, different mechanisms other than closed-loop control also would have influence depending on the particular limb combination. This may result in differences in performance depending upon the limb combination.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential explanation of limb combination performance differences for two-limb coordination tasks

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, specific forms of interlimb interaction that underlie the stability of coordination patterns have been investigated in relation to the coordination pattern performed , movement frequency (de Boer, Peper, & Beek, 2011), and the associated attentional costs (Ridderikhoff, Peper, & Beek, 2008). In particular, three forms of interlimb interactions can be dissociated based on the dependence on afferent, sensory information and the intention to execute a specific pattern (see Table 1).…”

Section: Temporal Bimanual Couplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both IP and AP coordination were predicted to improve across development, but the largest improvements were expected to occur for AP, due to CC myelination and associated inhibition of mirror movements (Hubers et al, 2008;Mayston et al, 1999). This differential improvement of IP and AP was predicted for planning and correction interactions only, because these interlimb interactions are assumed to involve interhemispheric communication and both interactions contribute to the differential stability of IP and AP coordination (de Boer et al, 2011;. Potential age-related changes in reflex interactions were expected to be equally strong for IP and AP (Ridderikhoff, Peper, et al, 2006).…”

Section: Aims and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 2). Because error correction has been found to be minimally involved in task AB when planning by itself can engender sufficient coordinative stability (de Boer et al, 2011;, the stabilizing effect of movement planning was assessed by comparing AB to UNm as well. Values of the KT and UNm conditions (with a 0°-phase shift) were subtracted from the matched AB conditions for all participants and tested in two separate ANOVAs.…”

Section: Strategic Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development of Temporal and Spatial Bimanual Coordination During Childhood

Boer¹,

Peper²,

Beek³

2012

Motor Control

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developmental changes in bimanual coordination were examined in four age groups: 6/7, 10/11, 14/15 years, and young adults. Temporal coupling was assessed through the stabilizing contributions of interlimb interactions related to planning, error correction, and reflexes during rhythmic wrist movements, by comparing various unimanual and bimanual tasks involving passive and active movements. Spatial coupling was assessed via bimanual line-circle drawing. With increasing age, temporal stability improved. Relative contributions of planning and reflex interactions to the achieved stability did not change, whereas error correction improved. In-phase and antiphase coordination developed at similar rates; implications of this result were discussed in terms of mirror-activity inhibition. Overall spatial drawing performance (circularity, variability, smoothness) improved with age, and spatial interference was smaller in adults than children. Whereas temporal coupling increased from 6/7 years to adulthood, spatial coupling changed mainly after 14/15 years. This difference in the development of temporal and spatial coupling corresponds to the anterior-posterior direction of corpus callosum myelination as reported in the literature.

show abstract

Biases in rhythmic sensorimotor coordination: Effects of modality and intentionality

Debats

Ridderikhoff

Boer

et al. 2013

Behavioural Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frequency-induced changes in interlimb interactions: Increasing manifestations of closed-loop control

Cited by 9 publications

References 52 publications

Potential explanation of limb combination performance differences for two-limb coordination tasks

Potential explanation of limb combination performance differences for two-limb coordination tasks

Development of Temporal and Spatial Bimanual Coordination During Childhood

Biases in rhythmic sensorimotor coordination: Effects of modality and intentionality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About