Lateralization of Kinesthetically Guided Spatial Perception

Nishizawa, Sho; Saslow, Carol A.

doi:10.1016/s0010-9452(87)80009-6

Cited by 17 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although tests on the typical left-side advantage yielded results generally consistent with previous findings for spatial motor tasks (Carnahan and Elliott, 1987;Nishizawa, 1991;Nishizawa and Saslow, 1987), these were inconsistent with predicted outcomes. The CE scores showed a typical left-side advantage in movements estimated at equal lengths as well as at other estimated lengths.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 56%

“…Previous studies have shown that lateralization effects are more evident in finger (e.g., Roy and MacKenzie, 1978;Nishizawa and Saslow, 1987) and foot positioning tasks (e.g., Carnahan and Elliott, 1987) than in arm positioning tasks (e.g., Roy and MacKenzie, 1978). The discrepancy between the extent of observable lateralization effects in the finger (or the foot) and the arm has been explained in several ways (e.g., Carnahan and Elliott, 1987;Nishizawa and Saslow, 1987;Kupers, 1972, 1973).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The discrepancy between the extent of observable lateralization effects in the finger (or the foot) and the arm has been explained in several ways (e.g., Carnahan and Elliott, 1987;Nishizawa and Saslow, 1987;Kupers, 1972, 1973). One other important factor which results in this lateral effect is referred to as the hemispace-hemisphere relationship (Heilman et al, 1984).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For motor tasks, it has been found that, in right-handed people, the left hemisphere is superior in the performance of sequential motor tasks (Edwards and Elliott, 1987;Elliott, 1985;Haaland and Delaney, 1981;Kimura, 1977;Kimura and Archibald, 1974;Kimura and Davidson, 1975;Nachshon and Carmon, 1975;Todor and Kyprie, 1980;Wyke, 1967), and the right hemisphere is superior in spatial discrimination (Guiard et al, 1983;Ingram, 1975;Kimura and Vanderwolf, 1970;Nachshon and Carmon, 1975;Nishizawa and Saslow, 1987). Most studies which have examined laterality effects on motor performance have used finger movement tasks and have shown evidence of laterality effects on performance, such as left hemisphere superiority in finger tapping and right hemisphere superiority in finger positioning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Lateral Difference in the Reproduction of Arm Positioning Movement: An Examination of the Hypothesis on the Levels of Psychological Processes.

Yamauchi

Imanaka²,

Nakayama³

et al. 1998

Appl Human Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the hypothesis on the levels of psychological processes (Hatta, 1977(Hatta, , 1978 accounts for lateral differences in arm positioning movement (a spatial localization task). Fifteen right-handed male subjects were asked to perform a constrained criterion movement, 12 cm in length, with the left or right arm. Then, after a 10-sec retention interval, they were asked to perform the movement with the same arm, estimating lengths of 6, 12 or 24 cm. Different levels of psychological processes were assumed to be involved in estimating these various movement lengths-half, the same, or double that of the original. All possible combinations of the arm (left/right) and three movement length were tested. The CE scores were lower (more accurate) for the left arm (half; 1.5 ± 8.1 mm, same; 4.3 ± 6.2 mm, double; 5.9 ± 20.3 mm) than those for the right arm (half; 5.9 ± 7.6 mm, same; 10.6 ± 10.6 mm, double; 11.8 ± 23.6 mm) in all conditions, indicating a lateral difference (the right hemisphere dominance) in arm positioning tasks. This typical lateral difference, which displayed no significant difference among conditions, is supposed to be mediated by complex or high-level psychological processes. These psychological processes are required by the subjects in the estimation of the various movement lengths. This study suggests that the level of psychological processes is a crucial factor in the manifestation of lateral differences in the performance of arm positioning movements.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 56%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Lateral Difference in the Reproduction of Arm Positioning Movement: An Examination of the Hypothesis on the Levels of Psychological Processes.

Yamauchi

Imanaka²,

Nakayama³

et al. 1998

Appl Human Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In some studies the absolute matching errors were less for the left than right limb when the same limb provided the reference and matching movements. This result was interpreted as a right hemisphere/left limb advantage in detecting and processing proprioceptive position information (Roy and MacKenzie 1978; Carnahan and Elliott 1987; Nishizawa and Saslow 1987; Riolo-Quinn 1991). However, other studies showed no significant differences in matching performance between the limbs (Wrisberg and Winter 1985; Carson et al 1990a, b; Imanaka et al 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Position sense asymmetry

Adamo

Martin

2008

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Asymmetries in upper limb position sense have been explained in the context of a left limb advantage derived from differences in hemispheric specialization in the processing of kinesthetic information. However, it is not clearly understood how the comparison of perceptual information associated with passive limb displacement and the corresponding matching movement resulting from the execution of a motor command contributes to these differences. In the present study, upper limb position sense was investigated in 12 right-hand-dominant young adults performing wrist position matching tasks which varied in terms of interhemispheric transfer, memory retrieval and whether the reference position was provided by the same or opposite limb. Right and left hand absolute matching errors were similar when the reference and matching positions were produced by the same hand but were 36% greater when matching the reference position with the opposite hand. When examining the constant errors generated from matching movements made with the same hand that provided the reference, the right and left hand matching errors (≈3°) were similar. However, when matching with the opposite limb, a large overshoot (P <0.05) characterized the error when the right hand matched the left hand reference while a large undershoot (P <0.05) characterized the error when the left hand matched the right hand reference. The overshoot and undershoot were of similar magnitude (≈4°). Although asymmetries in the central processing of proprioceptive information such as inter-hemispheric transfer may exist, the present study suggests that asymmetries in position sense predominantly result from a difference in the “gain of the respective proprioceptive sensory-motor loops”. This new hypothesis is strongly supported by a dual-linear model representing the right and left hand sensory-motor systems as well as morphological and physiological data.

show abstract

Impact of motor task execution on an individual’s ability to mirror forearm positions

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work is motivated by our goal of determining why individuals with stroke are impaired when locating their arms in space. We assessed the ability of individuals without neurological impairments to mirror their forearms during various motor tasks so that we could identify baseline performance in an unimpaired population. Nine right-hand dominant participants without neurological impairments mirrored forearm positions bi-directionally (i.e., right forearm mirrors left forearm, vice versa) for three motor tasks (i.e., passive, passive/active, and active) and two position identification modes (i.e., mirroring to a position stored in working memory versus concurrently felt by the opposite arm). During each trial, the participant's reference forearm moved to a flexion ([Formula: see text]) or extension ([Formula: see text]) position, and then, their opposite forearm mirrored the position of their reference forearm. The main finding across all tested conditions is that participants mirrored forearm positions with an average magnitude of error [Formula: see text]. When controlling their forearms' movements (active motor task), participants mirrored forearm positions more accurately by up to, on average, [Formula: see text] at the flexion location than at the extension location. Moreover, participants mirrored forearm positions more accurately by up to, on average, [Formula: see text] when their forearms were moved for them rather than when they controlled their forearms' movements. Task directionality and position identification mode did not significantly affect participant arm mirroring accuracy. These findings are relevant for interpreting in future work the reason why impairments occur, on similar tasks, in individuals with altered motor commands, working memory, and arm impedance, e.g., post-stroke hemiparesis.

show abstract

Lateralization of Kinesthetically Guided Spatial Perception

Cited by 17 publications

References 33 publications

Lateral Difference in the Reproduction of Arm Positioning Movement: An Examination of the Hypothesis on the Levels of Psychological Processes.

Lateral Difference in the Reproduction of Arm Positioning Movement: An Examination of the Hypothesis on the Levels of Psychological Processes.

Position sense asymmetry

Impact of motor task execution on an individual’s ability to mirror forearm positions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About