HAND PATH PRIMING 1125

HAND PATH PRIMING 1125

1126

VAN DER WEL, FLECKENSTEIN, JAX, AND ROSENBAUM

to be made from the last movement made. Prior to jumping over Kennerley, S. W., Sakai, K., & Rushworth, M. F. S. (2004). Organization obstacles, our participants had their hands resting on the table and

of action sequences and the role of the pre-SMA. Journal of Neurophys- made low, easy movements to bring the hand to the first target

iology, 91, 978 –993.

from which the experimental sequence would be launched. The Kosslyn, S. M. (1980). Image and mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni- first movements were not so different from those earlier, getting-

versity Press.

ready movements. There also appeared to be no critical reason to Lashley, K. S. (1930). Basic neural mechanisms in behavior. Psychological

Review, 37, 1–24.

make much larger jumps before the obstacles had to be circum- Lashley, K. S. (1942). The problem of cerebral organization in vision. vented. If there had been, the obstacles could not have been

Biological Symposia, 7, 301–322.

circumvented as well as they were after the fairly low jumps that Merton, P. A. (1972). How we control the contraction of our muscles. preceded them. The only time we saw exceptionally high jumps

Scientific American, 226,

30 –37.

before an obstacle was cleared was after another obstacle was Meulenbroek, R. G. J., Rosenbaum, D. A., Thomassen, A. J. W. M., cleared, but these jumps were high to begin with.

Loukopoulos, L. D., & Vaughan, J. (1996). Adaptation of a reaching Regardless of the exact reasons for the magnitude of the antic-

model to handwriting: How different effectors can produce the same ipatory and perseveratory effects obtained here, our research

written output, and other results. Psychological Research, 59, 64 –74. shows that biomechanical costs are balanced against computa-

Raibert, M. H. (1977). Motor control and learning by the state space model tional costs in motor control, a notion that fits well with the (Tech. Rep. AITR-439). Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Tech-

nology.

proposition that both kinematic and dynamic internal models can Rosenbaum, D. A. (1987). Successive approximations to a model of human

be used during trajectory planning (Kawato, 1999). Somehow, the motor programming. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), Psychology of learning and brain manages to negotiate the very different kinds of costs asso-

motivation (Vol. 21, pp. 153–182). Orlando, FL: Academic Press. ciated with biomechanics on the one hand and computation on the

Rosenbaum, D. A., Engelbrecht, S. E., Bushe, M. M., & Loukopoulos, other as it prepares for action. How it does so is an exciting

L. D. (1993). Knowledge model for selecting and producing reaching challenge for future research.

movements. Journal of Motor Behavior, 25, 217–227. Rosenbaum, D. A., Loukopoulos, L. D., Meulenbroek, R. G. J., Vaughan,

References

J., & Engelbrecht, S. E. (1995). Planning reaches by evaluating stored postures. Psychological Review, 102, 28 – 67.

Ashe, J., Lungu, O. V., Basford, A. T., & Lu, X. (2006). Cortical control Rosenbaum, D. A., Meulenbroek, R. G., Vaughan, J., & Jansen, C. (2001). of motor sequences. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 16, 213–221.

Posture-based motion planning: Applications to grasping. Psychological Averbeck, B. B., Sohn, J., & Lee, D. (2005). Activity in prefrontal cortex

Review, 108, 709 –734.

during dynamic selection of action sequences. Nature Neuroscience, 9, Rosenbaum, D. A., Weber, R. J., Hazelett, W. M., & Hindorff, V. (1986). 276 –282.

The parameter remapping effect in human performance: Evidence from Berkenblit, M. B., & Feldman, A. G. (1988). Some problems of motor

tongue twisters and finger fumblers. Journal of Memory and Language, control. Journal of Motor Behavior, 20, 369 –373.

25, 710 –725.

Castiello, U., & Stelmach, G. E. (1993). Generalized representation of Sabes, P. N., & Jordan, M. I. (1997). Obstacle avoidance and a perturbation handwriting: Evidence of effector independence. Acta Psychologica, 82,

sensitivity model for motor planning. Journal of Neuroscience, 15, 53– 68.

7119 –7128.

Enoka, R. M. (1988). Neuromechanical basis of kinesiology. Champaign, Sternberg, S., Monsell, S., Knoll, R. L., & Wright, C. E. (1978). The IL: Human Kinetics.

latency and duration of rapid movement sequences: Comparisons of Harrington, D. L., Rao, S. M., Haaland, K. Y., Bobholz, J. A., Mayer,

speech and typewriting. In G. E. Stelmach (Ed.), Information processing A. R., Binder, J. R., & Cox, R. W. (2000). Specialized neural systems

in motor control and learning (pp. 117–152). New York: Academic underlying representations of sequential movements. Journal of Cogni-

Press.

tive Neuroscience, 12, 56 –77. Swinnen, S. (1991). Motor control. In R. Dubelco (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Jax, S., & Rosenbaum, D. A. (in press). Hand path priming in manual

human biology (Vol. 5, pp. 105–129). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. obstacle avoidance: Evidence that the dorsal stream does not only

Worringham, C. J. (1991). Variability effects on the internal structure of control visually guided actions in real time. Journal of Experimental

rapid aiming movements. Journal of Motor Behavior, 23, 5– 8. Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.

Wright, C. E. (1993). Evaluating the special role of timing in the control of Kagan, J. (1971). Change and continuity in infancy. New York: Wiley.

handwriting. Acta Psychologica, 82, 5–52. Kawato, M. (1999). Internal models for motor control and trajectory

planning. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 9, 718 –727. Keele, S. W., Cohen, A., & Ivry, R. (1990). Motor programs: Concepts and

Received October 27, 2006 issues. In M. Jeannerod (Ed.), Attention and performance XIII: Motor

Revision received February 20, 2007 representation and control (pp. 77–110). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Accepted March 16, 2007 "