↓ Skip to main content

Goal-directed reaching: the allocentric coding of target location renders an offline mode of control

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
Goal-directed reaching: the allocentric coding of target location renders an offline mode of control
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00221-018-5205-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joseph Manzone, Matthew Heath

Abstract

Reaching to a veridical target permits an egocentric spatial code (i.e., absolute limb and target position) to effect fast and effective online trajectory corrections supported via the visuomotor networks of the dorsal visual pathway. In contrast, a response entailing decoupled spatial relations between stimulus and response is thought to be primarily mediated via an allocentric code (i.e., the position of a target relative to another external cue) laid down by the visuoperceptual networks of the ventral visual pathway. Because the ventral stream renders a temporally durable percept, it is thought that an allocentric code does not support a primarily online mode of control, but instead supports a mode wherein a response is evoked largely in advance of movement onset via central planning mechanisms (i.e., offline control). Here, we examined whether reaches defined via ego- and allocentric visual coordinates are supported via distinct control modes (i.e., online versus offline). Participants performed target-directed and allocentric reaches in limb visible and limb-occluded conditions. Notably, in the allocentric task, participants reached to a location that matched the position of a target stimulus relative to a reference stimulus, and to examine online trajectory amendments, we computed the proportion of variance explained (i.e., R2values) by the spatial position of the limb at 75% of movement time relative to a response's ultimate movement endpoint. Target-directed trials performed with limb vision showed more online corrections and greater endpoint precision than their limb-occluded counterparts, which in turn were associated with performance metrics comparable to allocentric trials performed with and without limb vision. Accordingly, we propose that the absence of ego-motion cues (i.e., limb vision) and/or the specification of a response via an allocentric code renders motor output served via the 'slow' visuoperceptual networks of the ventral visual pathway.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 22%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Professor 1 6%
Lecturer 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Sports and Recreations 1 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 February 2018.
All research outputs
#16,759,555
of 24,652,720 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#2,111
of 3,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,496
of 341,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#35
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,652,720 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,372 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,793 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.