{"title":"Structural Constraints Shape Force Estimation: Dissociating Internal Representation and Cross-Limb Mapping.","authors":"Lin Li, Yanxia Li","doi":"10.1177/17470218261481973","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Force estimation is commonly assumed to rely on a unitary internal representation, with differences across paradigms attributed to task demands or feedback availability. The present study tests this assumption by examining whether force estimation reflects the combined influence of multiple structural constraints. Specifically, we dissociate the contributions of internal representation and cross-limb mapping using a contrast-based framework. Participants performed three force estimation tasks-ipsilateral reproduction (IR), contralateral matching (CM), and contralateral reproduction (CR)-across three force levels (10%, 30%, and 50% of maximal voluntary isometric contraction). Error measures (constant error, absolute error, and variable error) were analyzed at both the task level and the structure level. At the task level, IR and CM produced comparable patterns of systematic bias but differed in error magnitude and variability, indicating that the two paradigms are not functionally equivalent. At the structure level, contrast-based analyses revealed dissociable effects of internal representation and cross-limb mapping. Both constraints introduced systematic positive bias and increased error magnitude, particularly at low force levels, while their influence diminished as force increased. In contrast, no statistically significant modulation of response variability was detected under the present experimental design, although the limited number of repetitions constrains the interpretation of this finding. These findings challenge unitary accounts of force estimation and support a framework in which behavior reflects the interaction of multiple constraints whose influence is dynamically weighted by sensory reliability.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"17470218261481973"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218261481973","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Force estimation is commonly assumed to rely on a unitary internal representation, with differences across paradigms attributed to task demands or feedback availability. The present study tests this assumption by examining whether force estimation reflects the combined influence of multiple structural constraints. Specifically, we dissociate the contributions of internal representation and cross-limb mapping using a contrast-based framework. Participants performed three force estimation tasks-ipsilateral reproduction (IR), contralateral matching (CM), and contralateral reproduction (CR)-across three force levels (10%, 30%, and 50% of maximal voluntary isometric contraction). Error measures (constant error, absolute error, and variable error) were analyzed at both the task level and the structure level. At the task level, IR and CM produced comparable patterns of systematic bias but differed in error magnitude and variability, indicating that the two paradigms are not functionally equivalent. At the structure level, contrast-based analyses revealed dissociable effects of internal representation and cross-limb mapping. Both constraints introduced systematic positive bias and increased error magnitude, particularly at low force levels, while their influence diminished as force increased. In contrast, no statistically significant modulation of response variability was detected under the present experimental design, although the limited number of repetitions constrains the interpretation of this finding. These findings challenge unitary accounts of force estimation and support a framework in which behavior reflects the interaction of multiple constraints whose influence is dynamically weighted by sensory reliability.
期刊介绍:
Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling.
QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form.
The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.