Testing the concurrent validity of a naturalistic upper extremity reaching task

Sydney Schaefer, C. R. Hengge

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Point-to-point reaching has been widely used to study upper extremity motor control. We have been developing a naturalistic reaching task that adds tool manipulation and object transport to this established paradigm. The purpose of this study was to determine the concurrent validity of a naturalistic reaching task in a sample of healthy adults. This task was compared to the criterion measure of standard point-to-point reaching. Twenty-eight adults performed unconstrained out-and-back movements in three different directions relative to constant start location along midline using their nondominant arm. In the naturalistic task, participants manipulated a tool to transport objects sequentially between physical targets anchored to the planar workspace. In the standard task, participants moved a digital cursor sequentially between virtual targets, veridical to the planar workspace. In both tasks, the primary measure of performance was trial time, which indicated the time to complete 15 reaches (five cycles of three reaches/target). Two other comparator tasks were also designed to test concurrent validity when components of the naturalistic task were added to the standard task. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients indicated minimal relationship between the naturalistic and standard tasks due to differences in progressive task difficulty. Accounting for this yielded a moderate linear relationship, indicating concurrent validity. The comparator tasks were also related to both the standard and naturalistic task. Thus, the principles of motor control and learning that have been established by the wealth of point-to-point reaching studies can still be applied to the naturalistic task to a certain extent.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)229-240
Number of pages12
JournalExperimental Brain Research
Volume234
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Upper Extremity
Nonparametric Statistics
Arm
Learning

Keywords

  • Concurrent validity
  • Naturalistic
  • Reaching
  • Upper extremity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuroscience(all)

Cite this

Testing the concurrent validity of a naturalistic upper extremity reaching task. / Schaefer, Sydney; Hengge, C. R.

In: Experimental Brain Research, Vol. 234, No. 1, 01.01.2016, p. 229-240.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{55c97578b47e45ac8781bb01ca08137d,
title = "Testing the concurrent validity of a naturalistic upper extremity reaching task",
abstract = "Point-to-point reaching has been widely used to study upper extremity motor control. We have been developing a naturalistic reaching task that adds tool manipulation and object transport to this established paradigm. The purpose of this study was to determine the concurrent validity of a naturalistic reaching task in a sample of healthy adults. This task was compared to the criterion measure of standard point-to-point reaching. Twenty-eight adults performed unconstrained out-and-back movements in three different directions relative to constant start location along midline using their nondominant arm. In the naturalistic task, participants manipulated a tool to transport objects sequentially between physical targets anchored to the planar workspace. In the standard task, participants moved a digital cursor sequentially between virtual targets, veridical to the planar workspace. In both tasks, the primary measure of performance was trial time, which indicated the time to complete 15 reaches (five cycles of three reaches/target). Two other comparator tasks were also designed to test concurrent validity when components of the naturalistic task were added to the standard task. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients indicated minimal relationship between the naturalistic and standard tasks due to differences in progressive task difficulty. Accounting for this yielded a moderate linear relationship, indicating concurrent validity. The comparator tasks were also related to both the standard and naturalistic task. Thus, the principles of motor control and learning that have been established by the wealth of point-to-point reaching studies can still be applied to the naturalistic task to a certain extent.",
keywords = "Concurrent validity, Naturalistic, Reaching, Upper extremity",
author = "Sydney Schaefer and Hengge, {C. R.}",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00221-015-4454-y",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "234",
pages = "229--240",
journal = "Experimental Brain Research",
issn = "0014-4819",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Testing the concurrent validity of a naturalistic upper extremity reaching task

AU - Schaefer, Sydney

AU - Hengge, C. R.

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - Point-to-point reaching has been widely used to study upper extremity motor control. We have been developing a naturalistic reaching task that adds tool manipulation and object transport to this established paradigm. The purpose of this study was to determine the concurrent validity of a naturalistic reaching task in a sample of healthy adults. This task was compared to the criterion measure of standard point-to-point reaching. Twenty-eight adults performed unconstrained out-and-back movements in three different directions relative to constant start location along midline using their nondominant arm. In the naturalistic task, participants manipulated a tool to transport objects sequentially between physical targets anchored to the planar workspace. In the standard task, participants moved a digital cursor sequentially between virtual targets, veridical to the planar workspace. In both tasks, the primary measure of performance was trial time, which indicated the time to complete 15 reaches (five cycles of three reaches/target). Two other comparator tasks were also designed to test concurrent validity when components of the naturalistic task were added to the standard task. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients indicated minimal relationship between the naturalistic and standard tasks due to differences in progressive task difficulty. Accounting for this yielded a moderate linear relationship, indicating concurrent validity. The comparator tasks were also related to both the standard and naturalistic task. Thus, the principles of motor control and learning that have been established by the wealth of point-to-point reaching studies can still be applied to the naturalistic task to a certain extent.

AB - Point-to-point reaching has been widely used to study upper extremity motor control. We have been developing a naturalistic reaching task that adds tool manipulation and object transport to this established paradigm. The purpose of this study was to determine the concurrent validity of a naturalistic reaching task in a sample of healthy adults. This task was compared to the criterion measure of standard point-to-point reaching. Twenty-eight adults performed unconstrained out-and-back movements in three different directions relative to constant start location along midline using their nondominant arm. In the naturalistic task, participants manipulated a tool to transport objects sequentially between physical targets anchored to the planar workspace. In the standard task, participants moved a digital cursor sequentially between virtual targets, veridical to the planar workspace. In both tasks, the primary measure of performance was trial time, which indicated the time to complete 15 reaches (five cycles of three reaches/target). Two other comparator tasks were also designed to test concurrent validity when components of the naturalistic task were added to the standard task. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients indicated minimal relationship between the naturalistic and standard tasks due to differences in progressive task difficulty. Accounting for this yielded a moderate linear relationship, indicating concurrent validity. The comparator tasks were also related to both the standard and naturalistic task. Thus, the principles of motor control and learning that have been established by the wealth of point-to-point reaching studies can still be applied to the naturalistic task to a certain extent.

KW - Concurrent validity

KW - Naturalistic

KW - Reaching

KW - Upper extremity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84954386026&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84954386026&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00221-015-4454-y

DO - 10.1007/s00221-015-4454-y

M3 - Article

C2 - 26438508

AN - SCOPUS:84954386026

VL - 234

SP - 229

EP - 240

JO - Experimental Brain Research

JF - Experimental Brain Research

SN - 0014-4819

IS - 1

ER -