RESUMEN
Aiming hand-held tools at targets in space entails adjustments in the dynamical organization of aiming patterns according to the required precision. We asked whether and how these adjustments are modified by the tool's mass distribution. Twelve participants performed reciprocal aiming movements with a 50-cm long wooden probe. Kinematic patterns of probe movements were used as a window into the behavioral dynamic underlying performance of a reciprocal aiming task. We crossed three levels of task difficulty (IDs 2.8, 4.5 and 6.1) with two types of probe varying in their mass distribution (proximal vs distal loading). Movement duration was affected by task difficulty and probe loading (shorter for larger targets and proximal probe loading). Progressive deviations from a sinusoidal movement pattern were observed as task difficulty increased. Such deviations were more pronounced with proximal probe loading. Results point to a higher degree of non-linearity in aiming dynamics when the probe was loaded proximally, which might reflect employment of additional perceptual-motor processes to control the position of its less stable tip at the vicinity of the targets. More generally, the effects of probe loading on aiming pattern and dynamics suggest that perceptual-motor processes responding to task level constraints are sensitive to, and not independent from, biomechanical, end-effector constraints.
Asunto(s)
Mano/fisiología , Desempeño Psicomotor/fisiología , Adulto , Fenómenos Biomecánicos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Tiempo de Reacción , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Individuals with unilateral cerebral palsy (CP) demonstrate reduced performance in upper limb tasks compared to typically developing (TD) peers. We examined whether task conditions modify differences between teenagers with and without CP during a reciprocal aiming task. Twenty teenagers (nine CP and 11 TD) moved a pointer between two targets as fast as possible without missing a target. Task conditions were manipulated by changing the targets' size, by modifying the inertial properties of the pointer and by varying the upper limb used to perform the task (preferred/non-affected and non-preferred/affected upper limbs). While compared to TD peers, CP teenagers exhibited lower performance (longer movement times). Such differences were attenuated when the task was performed with the preferred upper limb and when accuracy requirements were less stringent. CP teenagers were not differentially affected by the pointer inertia manipulation. Task conditions not only affected performance but also joint kinematics. CP teenagers revealed less movement at the elbow and more movement at the shoulder when performing the task with their less skilled upper limb. However, both CP and TD teenagers demonstrated a larger contribution of trunk movement when facing more challenging task conditions. The overall pattern of results indicated that the joint kinematics employed by individuals with unilateral CP constituted adaptive responses to task requirements. Thus, the explanation of the effects of unilateral CP on upper limb behavior needs to go beyond a context-indifferent manifestation of the brain injury to include the interaction between task demands and action capabilities.