Summary
Evidence for invariant relative timing is mostly based on comparisons between experimental conditions which differ in the average speed of the movements under study. The present experiment examines whether spontaneous variability of acceleration-time curves of aiming movements within a single experimental condition can also be described in terms of variable scaling parameters for both dimensions. This requires that the correlations between peak acceleration and peak deceleration, as well as those between time intervals defined by peak values and zero crossings, are high. In extensions of the elbow joint on a horizontal plane, the latter correlations turned out to be small or even negative. These results cannot be explained as being due to artifacts of several origins. To reconcile them with those based on comparisons between experimental conditions, a dual-level hypothesis of control in aiming movements is suggested. Only variability on one level can be described in terms of variable scaling parameters, and whether or not variability of acceleration-time curves can be described in this way depends on the relative contributions of both levels of control.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cooke, J.D. (1980). The organisation of simple, skilled movements. In Stelmach, G.E., & Requin, J. (Eds.), Tutorials in Motor Behavior (pp. 199–212). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
Derwort, A. (1938). Untersuchungen über den Zeitverlauf figurierter Bewegungen beim Menschen. Pflügers Archiv für die gesamte Physiologie, 240 661–675.
Freund, H.J., & Büdingen, H.J. (1978). The relationship between speed and amplitude of the fastest voluntary contractions of human arm muscles. Experimental Brain Research, 31 1–12.
Gentner, D.R. (1982). Evidence against a central control model of typing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8 753–810.
Ghez, C. (1979). Contributions of central programs to rapid limb movement in the cat. In Asanuma, H., & Wilson, V.J. (Eds.), Integration in the Nervous System (pp. 305–320). Tokio: Igahu-Shoin.
Hacker, W. (1974). Anforderungen an Regulation und Zeitbedarf bei geführten Bewegungen: Zur Gültigkeit des Derwort-Von Weizäcker'schen Gesetzes der konstanten Figurzeit. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 182 307–337.
Heuer, H. (1981). Fast aiming movements with the left and right arm: Evidence for two-process theories of motor control. Psychological Research, 43 81–96.
Howarth, C.I., Beggs, W.D.A., & Bowden, J.M. (1971). The relationship between speed and accuracy of movement aimed at a target. Acta Psychologica, 35 207–218.
Kelso, J.A.S., & Holt, K.G. (1980). Exploring a vibratory system analysis of human movement production. Journal of Neurophysiology, 43 1183–1196.
Kern, G. (1933). Motorische Umreißung optischer Gestalten. Neue Psychologische Studien, 9 65–104.
Meyer, D.E., Smith, J.E.K., & Wright, C.E. (1982). Models for the speed and accuracy of aimed movements. Psychological Review, 89 449–482.
Schmidt, R.A. (1980). On the theoretical status of time in motor program representation. In Stelmach, G.E., & Requin, J. (Eds.), Tutorials in Motor Behavior (pp. 145–166). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
Schmidt, R.A., & McGown, C.M. (1980). Terminal accuracy of unexpectedly loaded rapid movements: Evidence for a mass-spring mechanism in programming. Journal of Motor Behavior, 12 149–161.
Schmidt, R.A., Zelaznik, H.N., & Frank, J.S. (1978). Sources of inaccuracy in rapid movement. In Stelmach, G.E. (Ed.), Information Processing in Motor Control and Learning (pp. 183–203). New York: Academic Press.
Schmidt, R.A., Zelaznik, H.N., Hawkins, B., Frank, J.S., & Quinn, J.T. (1979). Motor-output variability: A theory for the accuracy of rapid motor acts. Psychological Review, 86, 415–451.
Schmidtke, H. (1960). Über die Struktur willkürlicher Bewegungen. Psychologische Beiträge, 5, 428–439.
Shapiro, D.C. (1977). A preliminary attempt to determine the duration of a motor program. In: Landers, D.M., Christina, R.W. (Eds.), Psychology of Motor Behavior and Sport, Vol. 1 (pp. 17–24). Champaign, Ill.: Human Kinetics Publishers.
Shapiro, D.C., Zernicke, R.F., Gregor, R.J., & Diestel, J.D. (1981). Evidence for generalized motor programs using gait pattern analysis. Journal of Motor Behavior, 13, 33–47.
Steel, R.D.G., & Torrie, J.H. (1960). Principles and Procedures of Statistics with Special Reference to the Biological Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Summers, J.J. (1975). The role of timing in motor program representation. Journal of Motor Behavior, 7, 229–241.
Terzuolo, C.A., & Viviani, P. (1979). The central representation of learned motor patterns. In: Talbott, R.E., & Humphrey, D.R. (Eds.), Posture and Movement (pp. 113–121). New York: Raven Press.
Viviani, P., & Terzuolo, C.A. (1980). Space-time invariance in learned motor skills. In Stelmach, G.E., Requin, J. (Eds.), Tutorials in Motor Behavior (pp. 525–533). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
Viviani, P., & Terzuolo, C.A. (1982). On the relation between word-specific patterns and the central control model of typing: A reply to Gentner. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 811–813.
v. Holst, E. (1939). Die relative Koordination als Phänomen und als Methode zentralnervöser Funktionsanalyse. Ergebnisse der Physiologie, 42, 228–306.
Vorberg, D., & Hambuch, R. (1978). On the temporal control of rhythmic performance. In Requin, J. (Ed.), Attention and Performance VII (pp. 535–555). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wing, A.M., & Kristofferson, A.B. (1973). Response delays and the timing of discrete motor responses. Perception & Psychophysics, 14, 5–12.
Wing, A.M., & Miller, E. (1983). Research note: Peak velocity timing invariance. Psychological Research, 46 (this issue).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Heuer, H. On re-scaleability of force and time in aiming movements. Psychol. Res 46, 73–86 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00308594
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00308594