Interlimb differences in trajectory and positional control mechanisms

R. L. Sainburg, Sydney Schaefer, L. B. Bagesteiro

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Previous findings suggest that movement trajectory and final position are specified and controlled differentially by the dominant and nondominant limb/hemisphere systems. In the current studies, we examine interlimb differences in trajectory planning and feedback mediated positional control mechanisms. The first study examines load compensation responses, whereas, the second study examines control of movements made to a range of distances. In the first study, the nondominant arm showed substantially better response to load compensation, whereas, the dominant arm over-compensated the effects of the load, producing a large and systematic overshoot of final position. In the second study, dominant arm movement amplitude was well predicted by peak acceleration, reflecting pre-planning of movement distance. However, nondominant arm peak accelerations did not predict movement distance well. Instead, the duration of acceleration varied systematically with peak velocity and movement amplitude. These findings suggest that the nondominant and dominant controllers specify and control movement distance through distinct mechanisms, the former utilizing a pulse-height strategy, and the latter using a pulse-width strategy. Taken together, these findings support the hypothesis that the dominant arm system is specialized for feedforward control of trajectory, and the nondominant system, for feedback mediated control of final limb posture.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1448-1451
Number of pages4
JournalUnknown Journal
Volume2
StatePublished - 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Arm
Trajectories
Planning
Feedforward control
Extremities
Feedback control
Feedback
Controllers
Posture
Compensation and Redress

Keywords

  • Coordination
  • Handedness
  • Motor Control

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Signal Processing
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
  • Health Informatics

Cite this

Interlimb differences in trajectory and positional control mechanisms. / Sainburg, R. L.; Schaefer, Sydney; Bagesteiro, L. B.

In: Unknown Journal, Vol. 2, 2003, p. 1448-1451.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sainburg, R. L. ; Schaefer, Sydney ; Bagesteiro, L. B. / Interlimb differences in trajectory and positional control mechanisms. In: Unknown Journal. 2003 ; Vol. 2. pp. 1448-1451.
@article{ef147ca7d5854cf3aa866138ce36e2cb,
title = "Interlimb differences in trajectory and positional control mechanisms",
abstract = "Previous findings suggest that movement trajectory and final position are specified and controlled differentially by the dominant and nondominant limb/hemisphere systems. In the current studies, we examine interlimb differences in trajectory planning and feedback mediated positional control mechanisms. The first study examines load compensation responses, whereas, the second study examines control of movements made to a range of distances. In the first study, the nondominant arm showed substantially better response to load compensation, whereas, the dominant arm over-compensated the effects of the load, producing a large and systematic overshoot of final position. In the second study, dominant arm movement amplitude was well predicted by peak acceleration, reflecting pre-planning of movement distance. However, nondominant arm peak accelerations did not predict movement distance well. Instead, the duration of acceleration varied systematically with peak velocity and movement amplitude. These findings suggest that the nondominant and dominant controllers specify and control movement distance through distinct mechanisms, the former utilizing a pulse-height strategy, and the latter using a pulse-width strategy. Taken together, these findings support the hypothesis that the dominant arm system is specialized for feedforward control of trajectory, and the nondominant system, for feedback mediated control of final limb posture.",
keywords = "Coordination, Handedness, Motor Control",
author = "Sainburg, {R. L.} and Sydney Schaefer and Bagesteiro, {L. B.}",
year = "2003",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2",
pages = "1448--1451",
journal = "Scanning Electron Microscopy",
issn = "0586-5581",
publisher = "Scanning Microscopy International",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interlimb differences in trajectory and positional control mechanisms

AU - Sainburg, R. L.

AU - Schaefer, Sydney

AU - Bagesteiro, L. B.

PY - 2003

Y1 - 2003

N2 - Previous findings suggest that movement trajectory and final position are specified and controlled differentially by the dominant and nondominant limb/hemisphere systems. In the current studies, we examine interlimb differences in trajectory planning and feedback mediated positional control mechanisms. The first study examines load compensation responses, whereas, the second study examines control of movements made to a range of distances. In the first study, the nondominant arm showed substantially better response to load compensation, whereas, the dominant arm over-compensated the effects of the load, producing a large and systematic overshoot of final position. In the second study, dominant arm movement amplitude was well predicted by peak acceleration, reflecting pre-planning of movement distance. However, nondominant arm peak accelerations did not predict movement distance well. Instead, the duration of acceleration varied systematically with peak velocity and movement amplitude. These findings suggest that the nondominant and dominant controllers specify and control movement distance through distinct mechanisms, the former utilizing a pulse-height strategy, and the latter using a pulse-width strategy. Taken together, these findings support the hypothesis that the dominant arm system is specialized for feedforward control of trajectory, and the nondominant system, for feedback mediated control of final limb posture.

AB - Previous findings suggest that movement trajectory and final position are specified and controlled differentially by the dominant and nondominant limb/hemisphere systems. In the current studies, we examine interlimb differences in trajectory planning and feedback mediated positional control mechanisms. The first study examines load compensation responses, whereas, the second study examines control of movements made to a range of distances. In the first study, the nondominant arm showed substantially better response to load compensation, whereas, the dominant arm over-compensated the effects of the load, producing a large and systematic overshoot of final position. In the second study, dominant arm movement amplitude was well predicted by peak acceleration, reflecting pre-planning of movement distance. However, nondominant arm peak accelerations did not predict movement distance well. Instead, the duration of acceleration varied systematically with peak velocity and movement amplitude. These findings suggest that the nondominant and dominant controllers specify and control movement distance through distinct mechanisms, the former utilizing a pulse-height strategy, and the latter using a pulse-width strategy. Taken together, these findings support the hypothesis that the dominant arm system is specialized for feedforward control of trajectory, and the nondominant system, for feedback mediated control of final limb posture.

KW - Coordination

KW - Handedness

KW - Motor Control

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=1542271645&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=1542271645&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 2

SP - 1448

EP - 1451

JO - Scanning Electron Microscopy

JF - Scanning Electron Microscopy

SN - 0586-5581

ER -