IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0265943.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Different planning policies for the initial movement velocity depending on whether the known uncertainty is in the cursor or in the target: Motor planning in situations where two potential movement distances exist

Author

Listed:
  • Ryoji Onagawa
  • Kae Mukai
  • Kazutoshi Kudo

Abstract

During goal-directed behaviors, individuals can be required to start a movement before deciding on the final goal. Previous studies have focused on the initial movement direction in situations involving multiple targets in different directions from the starting position and have shown that the movement is initiated in the average direction among the target directions. However, the previous studies only included situations with targets at equivalent distances, and the characteristics of motor planning in situations with multiple movement possibilities over different potential distances are unclear. In such situations, movement velocity is another important control variable. Furthermore, while previous studies examined situations with an uncertain motor target position, uncertainty can also exist in the effector position (e.g., body or tool locations). Therefore, we examined (1) whether the average output is confirmed in the initial movement velocity during execution in situations involving two potential movements with different distances. In addition, we examined (2) whether planning of the movement velocity can differ depending on the presence of uncertainty in the cursor or the target. In the main conditions, the participants were required to start a reaching movement with two potential movement distances; in the two-cursor condition, two cursors were presented before the start of the trial, and in the two-target condition, two targets were presented. As a control condition, a distance condition corresponding to each main condition was also performed. In the control condition, the initial movement velocity varied linearly with distance. Then, we tested whether the initial movement velocity in situations with two potential movement distances would follow the averaging output of the corresponding control condition. The results revealed that while the initial movement velocity in the two-target condition was slower than the averaging output, that in the two-cursor condition approached the averaging output. These results suggest that the velocity profile of the goal-directed movement is not simply averaged in a situation where two potential targets exist, and that there is a difference in the planning policy of the initial movement depending on whether the known uncertainty is for the movement goal or the effector.

Suggested Citation

  • Ryoji Onagawa & Kae Mukai & Kazutoshi Kudo, 2022. "Different planning policies for the initial movement velocity depending on whether the known uncertainty is in the cursor or in the target: Motor planning in situations where two potential movement di," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-19, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0265943
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265943
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0265943
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0265943&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0265943?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jason P. Gallivan & Kathryn S. Barton & Craig S. Chapman & Daniel M. Wolpert & J. Randall Flanagan, 2015. "Action plan co-optimization reveals the parallel encoding of competing reach movements," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 1-9, November.
    2. Shih-Wei Wu & Maria F Dal Martello & Laurence T Maloney, 2009. "Sub-Optimal Allocation of Time in Sequential Movements," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(12), pages 1-13, December.
    3. Marc O. Ernst & Martin S. Banks, 2002. "Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion," Nature, Nature, vol. 415(6870), pages 429-433, January.
    4. Brian M. Dekleva & Konrad P. Kording & Lee E. Miller, 2018. "Single reach plans in dorsal premotor cortex during a two-target task," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Aaron L. Wong & Adrian M. Haith, 2017. "Motor planning flexibly optimizes performance under uncertainty about task goals," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, April.
    6. Adrian M Haith & David M Huberdeau & John W Krakauer, 2015. "Hedging Your Bets: Intermediate Movements as Optimal Behavior in the Context of an Incomplete Decision," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, March.
    7. Vassilios Christopoulos & Paul R Schrater, 2015. "Dynamic Integration of Value Information into a Common Probability Currency as a Theory for Flexible Decision Making," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-26, September.
    8. Christopher M. Harris & Daniel M. Wolpert, 1998. "Signal-dependent noise determines motor planning," Nature, Nature, vol. 394(6695), pages 780-784, August.
    9. Nicky J. Welton & Howard H. Z. Thom, 2015. "Value of Information," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(5), pages 564-566, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arkady Zgonnikov & Nadim A. A. Atiya & Denis O'Hora & Iñaki Rañò & KongFatt Wong-Lin, 2019. "Beyond reach: Do symmetric changes in motor costs affect decision making? A registered report," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(4), pages 455-469, July.
    2. Seth W. Egger & Stephen G. Lisberger, 2022. "Neural structure of a sensory decoder for motor control," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, December.
    3. Shiva Farashahi & Chih-Chung Ting & Chang-Hao Kao & Shih-Wei Wu & Alireza Soltani, 2018. "Dynamic combination of sensory and reward information under time pressure," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-26, March.
    4. Nienke B Debats & Idsart Kingma & Peter J Beek & Jeroen B J Smeets, 2012. "Moving the Weber Fraction: The Perceptual Precision for Moment of Inertia Increases with Exploration Force," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(9), pages 1-9, September.
    5. Santiago Alonso-Diaz & Jessica F Cantlon & Steven T Piantadosi, 2018. "A threshold-free model of numerosity comparisons," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, April.
    6. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:4:p:455-469 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Vincenzo Varriale & Antonello Cammarano & Francesca Michelino & Mauro Caputo, 2021. "Sustainable Supply Chains with Blockchain, IoT and RFID: A Simulation on Order Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-23, June.
    8. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi & Giovanni Marin & Elena Paglialunga, 2016. "Eco-innovation, sustainable supply chains and environmental performance in European industries," LEM Papers Series 2016/19, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    9. Lee, Alice J. & Ames, Daniel R., 2017. "“I can’t pay more” versus “It’s not worth more”: Divergent effects of constraint and disparagement rationales in negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 16-28.
    10. Hussain, Hadia & Murtaza, Murtaza & Ajmal, Areeb & Ahmed, Afreen & Khan, Muhammad Ovais Khalid, 2020. "A study on the effects of social media advertisement on consumer’s attitude and customer response," MPRA Paper 104675, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. A. G. Fatullayev & Nizami A. Gasilov & Şahin Emrah Amrahov, 2019. "Numerical solution of linear inhomogeneous fuzzy delay differential equations," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 315-326, September.
    12. Cyril Chalendard, 2015. "Use of internal information, external information acquisition and customs underreporting," Working Papers halshs-01179445, HAL.
    13. Arun Advani & William Elming & Jonathan Shaw, 2023. "The Dynamic Effects of Tax Audits," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(3), pages 545-561, May.
    14. Philippe Aghion & Ufuk Akcigit & Matthieu Lequien & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2017. "Tax Simplicity and Heterogeneous Learning," NBER Working Papers 24049, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Marie Bjørneby & Annette Alstadsæter & Kjetil Telle, 2018. "Collusive tax evasion by employers and employees. Evidence from a randomized fi eld experiment in Norway," Discussion Papers 891, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    16. Chuangen Gao & Shuyang Gu & Jiguo Yu & Hai Du & Weili Wu, 2022. "Adaptive seeding for profit maximization in social networks," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 82(2), pages 413-432, February.
    17. Koessler, Frederic & Laclau, Marie & Renault, Jérôme & Tomala, Tristan, 2022. "Long information design," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 17(2), May.
    18. Jamal El-Den & Pratap Adikhari & Pratap Adikhari, 2017. "Social media in the service of social entrepreneurship: Identifying factors for better services," Journal of Advances in Humanities and Social Sciences, Dr. Yi-Hsing Hsieh, vol. 3(2), pages 105-114.
    19. Annette Alstadsæter & Wojciech Kopczuk & Kjetil Telle, 2019. "Social networks and tax avoidance: evidence from a well-defined Norwegian tax shelter," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 26(6), pages 1291-1328, December.
    20. Xiongnan Jin & Sejin Chun & Jooik Jung & Kyong-Ho Lee, 0. "A fast and scalable approach for IoT service selection based on a physical service model," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-16.
    21. Shogo Yonekura & Yasuo Kuniyoshi, 2017. "Bodily motion fluctuation improves reaching success rate in a neurophysical agent via geometric-stochastic resonance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-16, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0265943. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.