Returning home: location memory versus posture memory in object manipulation

Weigelt M, Cohen R, Rosenbaum DA (2007)
Experimental Brain Research 179(2): 191-198.

Journal Article | Published | English

No fulltext has been uploaded

Author
; ;
Abstract
Previous studies of object manipulation have suggested that when participants return an object to the place from which they just carried it, they tend to grasp the object for the target-back-to-home trips close to where they just grasped it for the home-to-target trips [Exp Brain Res 157(4):486-495, 2004; Psychon Bull Rev, 2006]. What was unclear from these previous studies was whether participants recalled postures or locations. According to the posture hypothesis, they remembered what body positions they adopted when they last held the object. According to the location hypothesis, they remembered where they held the object and then took hold of it there or nearby again. To distinguish between these possibilities, we had participants mount or dismount a platform after home-to-target moves and before target-back-to-home moves. In the control condition, they did not change their vertical position relative to the shelf containing the home and target platforms (they merely stepped sideways). We found that participants grasped the object at nearly the same place along its length as they had before, even if this meant adopting very different postures than before. This outcome is consistent with the location-recall account and is inconsistent with the posture-recall account. The implications for motor planning are discussed.
Publishing Year
ISSN
eISSN
PUB-ID

Cite this

Weigelt M, Cohen R, Rosenbaum DA. Returning home: location memory versus posture memory in object manipulation. Experimental Brain Research. 2007;179(2):191-198.
Weigelt, M., Cohen, R., & Rosenbaum, D. A. (2007). Returning home: location memory versus posture memory in object manipulation. Experimental Brain Research, 179(2), 191-198.
Weigelt, M., Cohen, R., and Rosenbaum, D. A. (2007). Returning home: location memory versus posture memory in object manipulation. Experimental Brain Research 179, 191-198.
Weigelt, M., Cohen, R., & Rosenbaum, D.A., 2007. Returning home: location memory versus posture memory in object manipulation. Experimental Brain Research, 179(2), p 191-198.
M. Weigelt, R. Cohen, and D.A. Rosenbaum, “Returning home: location memory versus posture memory in object manipulation”, Experimental Brain Research, vol. 179, 2007, pp. 191-198.
Weigelt, M., Cohen, R., Rosenbaum, D.A.: Returning home: location memory versus posture memory in object manipulation. Experimental Brain Research. 179, 191-198 (2007).
Weigelt, Matthias, Cohen, Rajal, and Rosenbaum, David A. “Returning home: location memory versus posture memory in object manipulation”. Experimental Brain Research 179.2 (2007): 191-198.
This data publication is cited in the following publications:
This publication cites the following data publications:

11 Citations in Europe PMC

Data provided by Europe PubMed Central.

Frames of reference in action plan recall: influence of hand and handedness.
Seegelke C, Hughes CM, Wunsch K, van der Wel R, Weigelt M., Exp Brain Res 233(10), 2015
PMID: 26070901
Habitual vs non-habitual manual actions: an ERP study on overt movement execution.
Westerholz J, Schack T, Schutz C, Koester D., PLoS ONE 9(4), 2014
PMID: 24691654
Choosing actions.
Rosenbaum DA, Chapman KM, Coelho CJ, Gong L, Studenka BE., Front Psychol 4(), 2013
PMID: 23761769
Influence of mechanical load on sequential effects.
Schutz C, Schack T., Exp Brain Res 228(4), 2013
PMID: 23727830
Optimal control in the critical phase of movement: a functional approach to motor planning processes.
Kunzell S, Augste C, Hering M, Maier S, Meinzinger AM, Sießmeir D., Acta Psychol (Amst) 143(3), 2013
PMID: 23727597
Prospective and retrospective effects in a virtual pointing task.
Schutz C, Schack T., Acta Psychol (Amst) 142(3), 2013
PMID: 23419809
Bimanual grasp planning reflects changing rather than fixed constraint dominance.
van der Wel RP, Rosenbaum DA., Exp Brain Res 205(3), 2010
PMID: 20658129
The development of end-state comfort planning in preschool children.
Weigelt M, Schack T., Exp Psychol 57(6), 2010
PMID: 20371425

19 References

Data provided by Europe PubMed Central.


SJ, Trends Cognit Sci 6(), 2002
The Theory of Event Coding (TEC): a framework for perception and action planning.
Hommel B, Musseler J, Aschersleben G, Prinz W., Behav Brain Sci 24(5), 2001
PMID: 12239891

W, J Exp Psychol Human Percept Perform 31(1), 2005

GD, Psychol Rev 95(), 1988
Constraints on human arm movement trajectories.
Marteniuk RG, MacKenzie CL, Jeannerod M, Athenes S, Dugas C., Can J Psychol 41(3), 1987
PMID: 3502905

DA, Hum Move Sci 11(), 1992

DA, 1990

DA, Psychol Rev 102(), 1995
From cognition to biomechanics and back: the end-state comfort effect and the middle-is-faster effect.
Rosenbaum DA, van Heugten CM, Caldwell GE., Acta Psychol (Amst) 94(1), 1996
PMID: 8885711

DA, ExpBrain Res 124(), 1999
Posture-based motion planning: applications to grasping.
Rosenbaum DA, Meulenbroek RJ, Vaughan J, Jansen C., Psychol Rev 108(4), 2001
PMID: 11699114

AUTHOR UNKNOWN, 0
Precision hypothesis and the end-state comfort effect.
Short MW, Cauraugh JH., Acta Psychol (Amst) 100(3), 1999
PMID: 9894689

MM, 1984
End-state comfort in bimanual object manipulation.
Weigelt M, Kunde W, Prinz W., Exp Psychol 53(2), 2006
PMID: 16909939

DB, Memory Cognit 28(), 2000

DM, Curr Biol 11(), 2001

Export

0 Marked Publications

Open Data PUB

Web of Science

View record in Web of Science®

Sources

PMID: 17119941
PubMed | Europe PMC

Search this title in

Google Scholar