Effects of stimulus cueing on bimanual grasp posture planning

Hughes C, Seegelke C, Reissig P, Schütz C (2012)
Experimental Brain Research 219(3): 391-401.

Journal Article | Published | English

No fulltext has been uploaded

Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether difficulties in bimanual grasp posture planning arise from conflicts in response selection. Forty-five participants were assigned to one of three groups (symbolic cueing, semi-symbolic cueing, and direct cueing) and instructed to reach for, grasp, and place two objects on a board in various end-orientations, depending on condition. In general, the tendency to adopt initial grasps that resulted in end-state comfort was significantly higher for the semi-symbolic, than that for the other two groups. There were, however, noticeable individual differences in grip behavior in the symbolic and direct cueing groups. Although the majority of participants performed the task in a similar fashion to the semi-symbolic group, there was a subset of participants (40 % in each group) who grasped the two objects using an overhand grip in virtually all trials, regardless of condition. It is hypothesized that the observed individual differences in grasp posture strategy arise from differences in motor planning abilities, or the strategies participants employ in order to comply with task demands. A secondary finding is that the degree of interlimb coupling was larger for congruent, than incongruent, conditions irrespective of stimulus cueing. This finding indicates that the interference in the execution of bimanual grasping and placing tasks arises from interference during the specification of movement parameters specific to planning and execution of bimanual movements, or neuronal cross-talk in efferent pathways, rather than response selection conflicts.
Publishing Year
ISSN
eISSN
PUB-ID

Cite this

Hughes C, Seegelke C, Reissig P, Schütz C. Effects of stimulus cueing on bimanual grasp posture planning. Experimental Brain Research. 2012;219(3):391-401.
Hughes, C., Seegelke, C., Reissig, P., & Schütz, C. (2012). Effects of stimulus cueing on bimanual grasp posture planning. Experimental Brain Research, 219(3), 391-401.
Hughes, C., Seegelke, C., Reissig, P., and Schütz, C. (2012). Effects of stimulus cueing on bimanual grasp posture planning. Experimental Brain Research 219, 391-401.
Hughes, C., et al., 2012. Effects of stimulus cueing on bimanual grasp posture planning. Experimental Brain Research, 219(3), p 391-401.
C. Hughes, et al., “Effects of stimulus cueing on bimanual grasp posture planning”, Experimental Brain Research, vol. 219, 2012, pp. 391-401.
Hughes, C., Seegelke, C., Reissig, P., Schütz, C.: Effects of stimulus cueing on bimanual grasp posture planning. Experimental Brain Research. 219, 391-401 (2012).
Hughes, Charmayne, Seegelke, Christian, Reissig, Paola, and Schütz, Christoph. “Effects of stimulus cueing on bimanual grasp posture planning”. Experimental Brain Research 219.3 (2012): 391-401.
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
Manual (a)symmetries in grasp posture planning: a short review.
Seegelke C, Hughes CM, Schack T., Front Psychol 5(), 2014
PMID: 25566153
Symmetries in action: on the interactive nature of planning constraints for bimanual object manipulation.
Huhn JM 3rd, Schimpf KA, van der Wel RP., Exp Brain Res 232(12), 2014
PMID: 25160868
Perturbations in action goal influence bimanual grasp posture planning.
Hughes CM, Seegelke C., J Mot Behav 45(6), 2013
PMID: 24006878
Event-related brain potentials for goal-related power grips.
Westerholz J, Schack T, Koester D., PLoS ONE 8(7), 2013
PMID: 23844211
Interlimb coordination during a cooperative bimanual object manipulation task.
Hughes CM, Maueler B, Tepper H, Seegelke C., Laterality 18(6), 2013
PMID: 23439109
Individual differences in motor planning during a multi-segment object manipulation task.
Seegelke C, Hughes CM, Schutz C, Schack T., Exp Brain Res 222(1-2), 2012
PMID: 22885998

29 References

Data provided by Europe PubMed Central.


W, Acta Psychol 96(), 1997
Bimanual grasp planning reflects changing rather than fixed constraint dominance.
van der Wel RP, Rosenbaum DA., Exp Brain Res 205(3), 2010
PMID: 20658129
End-state comfort in bimanual object manipulation.
Weigelt M, Kunde W, Prinz W., Exp Psychol 53(2), 2006
PMID: 16909939

Export

0 Marked Publications

Open Data PUB

Web of Science

View record in Web of Science®

Sources

PMID: 22562588
PubMed | Europe PMC

Search this title in

Google Scholar