Measuring motor awareness and metacognition at the start, middle, and end of a reaching movement

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Gabriela Oancea , Brian Maniscalco , Megan A.K. Peters , Craig S. Chapman
{"title":"Measuring motor awareness and metacognition at the start, middle, and end of a reaching movement","authors":"Gabriela Oancea ,&nbsp;Brian Maniscalco ,&nbsp;Megan A.K. Peters ,&nbsp;Craig S. Chapman","doi":"10.1016/j.concog.2025.103878","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The ability to monitor our arm position during goal-directed behaviour allows us to bring our limb to a target as accurately as possible. Despite our success in executing accurate movements, some work suggests that individuals have limited access to information about their limb position. However, other evidence from metacognition research indicates that people have some access to details about their movements. In these studies, individuals are asked to rate their confidence after making judgements about their movements and tend to give higher confidence ratings when they are correct, showing some capacity for self-monitoring. These conflicting results suggest that we may not be able to monitor an entire movement from start to end. In the current study, participants (n = 50) made reaching movements toward targets on a screen. They were then visually presented with two movement paths: one being their actual trajectory and the other being a visually deviated version. Here, we manipulated the location that the deviation was implemented (i.e., start, middle, or end of the path). Participants were then asked to determine which trajectory was their own, while also rating their confidence in their response. Overall, accuracy was lower than expected. Nevertheless, accuracy was significantly lower when deviations occurred at the start of the reach, indicating that awareness of limb position is further reduced at the start of a movement. Additionally, participants were able to metacognitively monitor their movements because their confidence scaled with their accuracy in the task. Finally, differences in metacognitive processes between locations were found, with higher average confidence in the middle of a movement when accuracy was held constant. We conclude that people have a remarkable blindness to the properties of their own movements. As well, monitoring of a limb is significantly reduced at the start of a movement suggesting reduced attention to limb position at this time, possibly due to movement programming demands.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51358,"journal":{"name":"Consciousness and Cognition","volume":"132 ","pages":"Article 103878"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Consciousness and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810025000716","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The ability to monitor our arm position during goal-directed behaviour allows us to bring our limb to a target as accurately as possible. Despite our success in executing accurate movements, some work suggests that individuals have limited access to information about their limb position. However, other evidence from metacognition research indicates that people have some access to details about their movements. In these studies, individuals are asked to rate their confidence after making judgements about their movements and tend to give higher confidence ratings when they are correct, showing some capacity for self-monitoring. These conflicting results suggest that we may not be able to monitor an entire movement from start to end. In the current study, participants (n = 50) made reaching movements toward targets on a screen. They were then visually presented with two movement paths: one being their actual trajectory and the other being a visually deviated version. Here, we manipulated the location that the deviation was implemented (i.e., start, middle, or end of the path). Participants were then asked to determine which trajectory was their own, while also rating their confidence in their response. Overall, accuracy was lower than expected. Nevertheless, accuracy was significantly lower when deviations occurred at the start of the reach, indicating that awareness of limb position is further reduced at the start of a movement. Additionally, participants were able to metacognitively monitor their movements because their confidence scaled with their accuracy in the task. Finally, differences in metacognitive processes between locations were found, with higher average confidence in the middle of a movement when accuracy was held constant. We conclude that people have a remarkable blindness to the properties of their own movements. As well, monitoring of a limb is significantly reduced at the start of a movement suggesting reduced attention to limb position at this time, possibly due to movement programming demands.
测量伸手动作开始、中间和结束时的运动意识和元认知
在目标导向行为中监测手臂位置的能力使我们能够尽可能准确地将肢体对准目标。尽管我们成功地完成了精确的动作,但一些研究表明,个体对自己肢体位置的信息获取有限。然而,来自元认知研究的其他证据表明,人们对自己的动作细节有一定的了解。在这些研究中,受试者被要求在对自己的动作做出判断后给自己的信心打分,当他们判断正确时,往往会给出更高的自信评分,显示出一定的自我监控能力。这些相互矛盾的结果表明,我们可能无法从头到尾监测整个运动。在目前的研究中,参与者(n = 50)对屏幕上的目标做出了伸手的动作。然后,他们在视觉上看到两条运动路径:一条是他们的实际轨迹,另一条是视觉上偏离的版本。在这里,我们操纵了实现偏差的位置(即,路径的开始、中间或结束)。然后,参与者被要求确定哪条轨迹是他们自己的,同时还要评估他们对自己回答的信心。总体而言,准确率低于预期。然而,当到达开始时出现偏差时,准确性显着降低,表明在运动开始时对肢体位置的意识进一步降低。此外,参与者能够元认知地监控他们的动作,因为他们的信心与他们在任务中的准确性成正比。最后,发现不同位置之间元认知过程的差异,当准确度保持不变时,运动中间的平均置信度更高。我们得出的结论是,人们对自己动作的性质有一种明显的盲目。此外,在运动开始时,对肢体的监测明显减少,这表明此时对肢体位置的关注减少,可能是由于运动编程的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Consciousness and Cognition
Consciousness and Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
123
期刊介绍: Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal provides a forum for a natural-science approach to the issues of consciousness, voluntary control, and self. The journal features empirical research (in the form of regular articles and short reports) and theoretical articles. Integrative theoretical and critical literature reviews, and tutorial reviews are also published. The journal aims to be both scientifically rigorous and open to novel contributions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信