Effects of preparing a manual movement towards and away from the body on visual and tactile probe detection.
José Van Velzen, Leola Thomas-Chirnside
Poster
Time: 2009-07-02 09:00 AM – 10:30 AM
Last modified: 2009-06-04
Abstract
The experiment presented here investigated the links between action and attentional enhancement of sensory processing for manual movements in depth in peripersonal space. To this end, detection of visual and tactile probe stimuli presented during response preparation was compared for movement towards and away from the body in a Go/Nogo paradigm. Further, to assess the spatial distribution of movement-related effects on tactile and visual processing, probe were presented from locations within and outside the area of pragmatic space of the response hand.
An auditory cue instructed to prepare a movement towards or away from the body. Execution of the manual response had to be withheld until a ‘go’ signal was presented. In a proportion of trials, a tactile or a visual probe stimulus was presented during the interval between the cue and the ‘go’ signal.
Somatosensory probe stimuli were presented at one of three locations aligned in depth with the goal location of the movement towards the body in depth (sternum, left/right shoulder). Visual probe stimuli were presented aligned in depth with the goal location of the movement away from the body (midline, left/right visual field). Participants were instructed to vocally respond to visual and tactile probes and withhold their manual response until the Go signal was presented. After the ‘go’ signal the manual movement was executed with the right hand.
Manual reaction times were faster for movements towards than movements away from the body. Further, when a movement away from the body was being prepared, vocal reaction times were fastest for stimuli on the right and this was true for both visual and tactile probes. When a movement towards to the body was prepared, vocal reaction times were faster to probes presented on the left, for both tactile and visual probes.
These results suggest that the spatial distribution of the effects of movement preparation on visual and somatosensory processing in peripersonal space is shaped by the pragmatic space of the response hand, which in the present experiment was right-lateralised for external space, but left-lateralised for the probed area of body space.
An auditory cue instructed to prepare a movement towards or away from the body. Execution of the manual response had to be withheld until a ‘go’ signal was presented. In a proportion of trials, a tactile or a visual probe stimulus was presented during the interval between the cue and the ‘go’ signal.
Somatosensory probe stimuli were presented at one of three locations aligned in depth with the goal location of the movement towards the body in depth (sternum, left/right shoulder). Visual probe stimuli were presented aligned in depth with the goal location of the movement away from the body (midline, left/right visual field). Participants were instructed to vocally respond to visual and tactile probes and withhold their manual response until the Go signal was presented. After the ‘go’ signal the manual movement was executed with the right hand.
Manual reaction times were faster for movements towards than movements away from the body. Further, when a movement away from the body was being prepared, vocal reaction times were fastest for stimuli on the right and this was true for both visual and tactile probes. When a movement towards to the body was prepared, vocal reaction times were faster to probes presented on the left, for both tactile and visual probes.
These results suggest that the spatial distribution of the effects of movement preparation on visual and somatosensory processing in peripersonal space is shaped by the pragmatic space of the response hand, which in the present experiment was right-lateralised for external space, but left-lateralised for the probed area of body space.