Reaching trajectories unravel modality-dependent temporal dynamics of the automatic process in the Simon task: a model-based approach

Salzer, Yael; Friedman, Jason

doi:10.1007/s00426-019-01177-3

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This so-called Simon effect has most often been observed when responses are simple key presses with the fingers of the left and right hand (e.g., Lien & Proctor, 2000 ; Hübner & Mishra, 2016 ; Mittelstädt et al, 2022 ). However, the effect can also be reliably measured when participants use other response effectors—vocal (e.g., Treccani et al, 2017 ; Wühr & Ansorge, 2007 ), eye (e.g., Leuthold & Schröter, 2006 ) and foot (e.g., Janczyk & Leuthold, 2017 ; Miller, 2016 ) responses—or perform more complex, continuous movements like reaching towards left versus right response boards (e.g., Salzer & Friedman, 2020 ; Finkbeiner & Heathcote, 2016 ), or moving a mouse cursor to response boxes presented on the left versus right side of the screen (e.g., Scherbaum et al, 2010 ; Grage et al, 2019 ; Wirth et al, 2020 ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Motor demands influence conflict processing in a mouse-tracking Simon task

Mittelstädt

Leuthold

Mackenzie

2022

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have shown incorrect motor activation when making perceptual decisions under conflict, but the potential involvement of motor processes in conflict resolution is still unclear. The present study tested whether the effects of distracting information may be reduced when anticipated motor processing demands increase. Specifically, across two mouse-tracking Simon experiments, we manipulated blockwise motor demands (high vs. low) by requiring participants to move a mouse cursor to either large versus small (Experiment 1) or near versus far (Experiment 2) response boxes presented on the screen. We reasoned that participants would increase action control in blocks with high versus low motor demands and that this would reduce the distracting effect of location-based activation. The results support this hypothesis: Simon effects were reduced under high versus low motor demands and this modulation held even when controlling for time-varying fluctuations in distractor-based activation via distributional analyses (i.e., delta plots). Thus, the present findings indicate that anticipation of different motor costs can influence conflict processing. We propose that the competition between distractor-based and target-based activation is biased at premotor and/or motor stages in anticipation of motor demands, but also discuss alternative implementations of action control.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Motor demands influence conflict processing in a mouse-tracking Simon task

Mittelstädt

Leuthold

Mackenzie

2022

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, its relevance for understanding changes in movement coordination of everyday activities such as reaching and grasping has only recently been acknowledged: Cisek (2007), Cisek and Kalaska (2010), and Cisek and Pastor-Bernier (2014) highlighted the embodied nature of motor decision making, and its temporal dynamics during movement planning and control in a series of theoretical papers. Following this approach, Gallivan and Chapman (2014), Gallivan et al (2018), Krüger and Hermsdörfer (2019), and Salzer and Friedman (2019) provided empirical evidence for these assumptions by showing changes in the execution of reaching movements under different conditions for motor decision making. It has been suggested that the perceived or expected biomechanical costs of a movement can reverse decisions to reach to particular targets (Burk et al, 2014) and can bias perceptual decision making when coupled to motor responses (Hagura et al, 2017).…”

Section: Developmental Embodiment Research: Cross-disciplinary Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Developmental Framework for Embodiment Research: The Next Step Toward Integrating Concepts and Methods

Lux

Non

Pexman

et al. 2021

Front. Syst. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Embodiment research is at a turning point. There is an increasing amount of data and studies investigating embodiment phenomena and their role in mental processing and functions from across a wide range of disciplines and theoretical schools within the life sciences. However, the integration of behavioral data with data from different biological levels is challenging for the involved research fields such as movement psychology, social and developmental neuroscience, computational psychosomatics, social and behavioral epigenetics, human-centered robotics, and many more. This highlights the need for an interdisciplinary framework of embodiment research. In addition, there is a growing need for a cross-disciplinary consensus on level-specific criteria of embodiment. We propose that a developmental perspective on embodiment is able to provide a framework for overcoming such pressing issues, providing analytical tools to link timescales and levels of embodiment specific to the function under study, uncovering the underlying developmental processes, clarifying level-specific embodiment criteria, and providing a matrix and platform to bridge disciplinary boundaries among the involved research fields.

show abstract

“…In recent years, researchers have used hand-tracking techniques to investigate the within- and cross-trial dynamics of cognitive control by measuring the spatial and temporal characteristics of hand movements as participants perform congruency tasks by navigating a mouse cursor ( mouse tracking ; Incera & McLennan, 2018; Scherbaum & Dshemuchadse, 2019; Scherbaum et al, 2010) or by reaching to touch targets on a digital display ( reach tracking ; Erb & Marcovitch, 2018, 2019; Finkbeiner & Heathcote, 2016; Salzer & Friedman, 2019; Scorolli et al, 2014; Tillman et al, 2016). In addition to error rate and RT (time elapsed between stimulus onset and response completion), these techniques provide measures of initiation time (time elapsed between stimulus onset and movement onset), movement time (the time elapsed between movement onset and response completion), and curvature (the degree to which a participant’s hand movement deviated from a direct path to the selected target).…”

Section: The Dynamics Of Cognitive Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linking the dynamics of cognitive control to individual differences in working memory capacity: Evidence from reaching behavior.

Erb¹,

Welhaf²,

Smeekens³

et al. 2021

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We used a technique known as reach tracking to investigate how individual differences in working memory capacity (WMC) relate to the functioning of two processes proposed to underlie cognitive control: a threshold adjustment process that temporarily inhibits motor output in response to signals of conflict and a controlled selection process that recruits top-down control to guide stimulus-response translation. Undergraduates (N = 135) performed two WMC tasks (updating counters and symmetry span) and a reach-tracking version of the Eriksen flanker task. Consistent with previous research using button-press flanker tasks, WMC significantly correlated with response time (RT) performance, with higher WMC scores corresponding to smaller congruency effects. Given that RTs reflect the combined functioning of multiple processes underlying cognitive control, we interpreted this effect to reflect a general link between WMC and both the threshold adjustment process and controlled selection process. We also found a significant association between WMC and participants' reach trajectories, with higher WMC scores corresponding to more direct reach movements on incongruent trials involving stimulus-response overlap with the preceding trial. We interpreted this effect to reflect a more specific link between WMC and the functioning of the controlled selection process. We discuss the observed links between WMC and cognitive control in relation to the unity and diversity of executive functions framework and in relation to the role of prefrontal and striatal dopamine in supporting adaptive cognitive control.

show abstract

Reaching trajectories unravel modality-dependent temporal dynamics of the automatic process in the Simon task: a model-based approach

Cited by 5 publications

References 50 publications

Motor demands influence conflict processing in a mouse-tracking Simon task

Motor demands influence conflict processing in a mouse-tracking Simon task

A Developmental Framework for Embodiment Research: The Next Step Toward Integrating Concepts and Methods

Linking the dynamics of cognitive control to individual differences in working memory capacity: Evidence from reaching behavior.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About