Kinematic characteristics of second‐order motor planning and performance in 6‐ and 10‐year‐old children and adults: Effects of age and task constraints

Abstract

This study explored age‐related differences in motor planning as expressed in arm‐hand kinematics during a sequential peg moving task with varying demands on goal insertion complexity (second‐order planning). The peg was a vertical cylinder with either a circular or semicircular base. The task was to transport the peg between two positions and rotate it various amounts horizontally before fitting into its final position. The amount of rotation required was either 0°, 90°, 180°, or −90°. The reaching for the peg, the displacement of it, and the way the rotation was accomplished was analyzed. Assessments of end state comfort, goal interpretation errors, and type of grip used were also included. Participants were two groups of typically developing children, one younger (Mage = 6.7 years) and one older (Mage = 10.3 years), and one adult group (Mage = 34.9 years). The children, particularly 6‐year‐olds, displayed less efficient prehensile movement organization than adults. Related to less efficient motor planning, 6‐year‐olds, mainly, had shorter reach‐to‐grasp onset latencies, higher velocities, and shorter time to peak velocities, and longer grasp durations than adults. Importantly, the adults rotated the peg during transport. In contrast, the children made corrective rotations after the hand had arrived at the goal.

Movement Matters! Understanding the Developmental Trajectory of Embodied Planning

“…Motor planning is defined as the ability to organize motor behavior to accomplish an anticipated goal-directed action. By definition motor planning processes depend on goal proximity: To adjust motor behavior to an imminent goal is referred to as first-order motor planning, whereas adjusting to subsequent goals is referred to as second-order motor planning (Rosenbaum et al, 2012 ; Domellöf et al, 2020 ). In tasks assessing motor planning, participants are required to first plan and then execute a motor sequence, during which the motor system needs to be controlled and can be adjusted.…”

“…During task execution, movement trajectories in 3D space can be captured (i.e., kinematics, see Figure 1 ). Although developmental studies exist that analyzed children's kinematics and response times (Domellöf et al, 2020 ), only a few combined the measures to explore the interaction between motor and cognitive skills (for an exception, see Gottwald et al, 2016 ). Domellöf et al ( 2020 ) analyzed age-related differences in the spatiotemporal segmentation of the movement path for the wrist, index finger, and object during a peg fitting task.…”

“…Although developmental studies exist that analyzed children's kinematics and response times (Domellöf et al, 2020 ), only a few combined the measures to explore the interaction between motor and cognitive skills (for an exception, see Gottwald et al, 2016 ). Domellöf et al ( 2020 ) analyzed age-related differences in the spatiotemporal segmentation of the movement path for the wrist, index finger, and object during a peg fitting task. Their kinematic analyses provided a more detailed picture of the time course of motor planning and revealed developmental differences: While adults rotated the peg during transport, 6–10 year-old children most often did so only after reaching the goal.…”

Time to Plan : How to support everyday planning in adolescents with intellectual disability

“…A skilled planner will take anticipatory actions to build the plan before acting. Anticipatory actions have been seen in both theoretical cognitive planning tasks (Davies, 2005) and motor planning tasks (Domellöf et al, 2020). Davies (2005) discussed the published literature on the role of expert knowledge in relation to the adoption of different planning strategies and Gilhooly (2005) discussed the literature on differences in planning by expert and novice chess players.…”

“…Davies (2005) discussed the published literature on the role of expert knowledge in relation to the adoption of different planning strategies and Gilhooly (2005) discussed the literature on differences in planning by expert and novice chess players. Domellöf et al (2020), compared motor planning in children and adults and found that both adults and children were able to complete the task of grasping, transporting, and rotating pegs. However, the adults rotated the peg during transport while the children did so mostly after reaching the goal, meaning that the adults made an anticipatory action before encountering the issue at hand.…”