Movement prediction and movement production.

Wexler, Mark; Klam, François

doi:10.1037/0096-1523.27.1.48

Cited by 45 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In these two later conditions, there was either no active control of the motion trajectory (pursuit) or no motor action at all. Active motor control is known to improve accuracy in target tracking (Steinbach, 1969), haptic perception (Smith et al, 2009), and anticipation of the position of a moving target (Wexler & Klam, 2001). A third and obvious difference is that in the visual target condition, the movement transfer would have to be cross-modal, originating from visual or oculomotor signals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalized movement representation in haptic perception.

Dupin

Hayward

Wexler

2017

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The extraction of spatial information by touch often involves exploratory movements, with tactile and kinesthetic signals combined to construct a spatial haptic percept. However, the body has many tactile sensory surfaces that can move independently, giving rise to the source binding problem: when there are multiple tactile signals originating from sensory surfaces with multiple movements, are the tactile and kinesthetic signals bound to one another? We studied haptic signal combination by applying the tactile signal to a stationary fingertip while another body part (the other hand or a foot) or a visual target moves, and using a task that can only be done if the tactile and kinesthetic signals are combined. We found that both direction and speed of movement transfer across limbs, but only direction transfers between visual target motion and the tactile signal. In control experiments, we excluded the role of explicit reasoning or knowledge of motion kinematics in this transfer. These results demonstrate the existence of 2 motion representations in the haptic system-one of direction and another of speed or amplitude-that are both source-free or unbound from their sensory surface of origin. These representations may well underlie our flexibility in haptic perception and sensorimotor control. Public Significance StatementHaptic perception or active touch involves 2 types of sensory signals: tactile sensations and proprioceptive or motor signals about the movement of the fingertip or other sensory surface. While these signals usually come from the same limb, we have recently shown that tactile signals from 1 hand can be combined with proprioceptive movement information from the other hand, a phenomenon that we call "haptic transfer." Here we extend these results by showing that haptic transfer can occur between the feet and hands. Additionally, movement signals in haptic transfer can even come from eye movements or visual motion, but in this case less information is transferred than between limbs. These results indicate that, in haptic perception, information about the movement of the sensory surface is represented in a simplified way, without reference to the actual body part involved. Additionally, our results indicate that signals about movement direction might be represented differently than those about speed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalized movement representation in haptic perception.

Dupin

Hayward

Wexler

2017

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Anticipation is a pervasive aspect of behavior (Kowler, 1989;Witney et al, 2000;Wexler and Klam, 2001). A motor system in which the role of anticipation has been extensively studied is the smooth pursuit eye-movement system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anticipatory Movement Timing Using Prediction and External Cues

Badler¹,

Heinen²

2006

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals often make anticipatory movements to compensate for slow reaction times. Anticipatory movements can be timed using external, sensory cues, or by an internal prediction of when an event will occur. However, it is unknown whether external or internal cues dominate the anticipatory response when both are present. Smooth pursuit eye movements are generated by a motor system heavily influenced by anticipation. We measured pursuit to determine how its timing was influenced when both a predictable event and a visual cue were present. Monkeys tracked a moving target that appeared at a constant time relative to the onset of a fixation point. At a randomized time before target onset, the fixation point disappeared, creating a temporal "gap" that cued impending target motion. We found that the gap onset cue and prediction of target onset together determined pursuit initiation time. We also investigated whether prediction could override the gap onset cue or vice versa by manipulating target onset and, hence, the duration of time that the animal had to estimate to predict it. When target motion began earlier, the pursuit system relied more on prediction to trigger a movement, whereas the cue was more often used when the target moved later. Pursuit latency in previous trials partially accounted for this behavior. The results suggest that neither internal nor external factors dominate to control the anticipatory response and that the relative contributions vary with stimulus conditions. A model in which neuronal anticipation and fixation signals interact can explain the results.

show abstract

“…It is well recognized that ocular tracking of a moving object involves predictive mechanisms in both monkeys (Keller & Johnsen, 1990) and humans (Rashbass, 1961;van den Berg, 1988;Wexler & Klam, 2001). For example, the predictive component of smooth pursuit is susceptible to expectations derived from verbal or visual cues regarding the upcoming motion trajectory (Kowler, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ocular tracking of biological and nonbiological motion: The effect of instructed agency

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent findings suggest that visuomotor performance is modulated by people's beliefs about the agency (e.g., animate vs. inanimate) behind the events they perceive. This study investigated the effect of instructed agency on ocular tracking of point-light motions with biological and nonbiological velocity profiles. The motions followed either a relatively simple (ellipse) or a more complex (scribble) trajectory, and agency was manipulated by informing the participants that the motions they saw were either human or computer generated. In line with previous findings, tracking performance was better for biological than for nonbiological motions, and this effect was particularly pronounced for the simpler (elliptical) motions. The biological advantage was also larger for the human than for the computer instruction condition, but only for a measure that captured the predictive component of smooth pursuit. These results suggest that ocular tracking is influenced by the internal forward model people choose to adopt.

show abstract

Movement prediction and movement production.

Cited by 45 publications

References 39 publications

Generalized movement representation in haptic perception.

Generalized movement representation in haptic perception.

Anticipatory Movement Timing Using Prediction and External Cues

Ocular tracking of biological and nonbiological motion: The effect of instructed agency

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About