Marnie Ann Spiegel

The functional role of working memory in the (re-)planning and execution of grasping movements.

Three experiments were conducted to dissociate movement planning costs and movement execution costs in working memory (WM). The aim of the study was to clarify what kind of WM processes (verbal, spatial, or both) are recruited during movement planning and movement execution. Therefore, a WM task (verbal and spatial versions) was combined with a high-precision manual action. Participants initially planned a placing movement toward 1 of 2 targets, subsequently encoded verbal or spatial information in WM, and then executed the movement during the retention phase. We tested the impact of movement execution on memory performance (Experiment 1), the role of WM task difficulty as a moderating variable in motor-memory interactions (Experiment 2), and the impact of implementing a new motor plan during memory retention (Experiment 3). Our results show that movement execution disrupted spatial more than verbal memory (Experiment 1) and that this domain-specific interference pattern was independent of WM task difficulty (Experiment 2). Hence, the results of Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrate that executing a prepared movement recruits domain-specific visuospatial memory resources. Experiment 3 involved trials that required the implementation of a new motor plan. The additional planning requirement during the retention phase reduced performance in both WM tasks in equal measure beyond the relative movement execution costs observed in Experiments 1 and 2. These results provide evidence for distinct roles of WM in manual actions, with action execution requiring principally modality-specific capacities and (re-)planning engaging modality-general WM resources.

The costs of changing an intended action: movement planning, but not execution, interferes with verbal working memory.

How much cognitive effort does it take to change a movement plan? In previous studies, it has been shown that humans plan and represent actions in advance, but it remains unclear whether or not action planning and verbal working memory share cognitive resources. Using a novel experimental paradigm, we combined in two experiments a grasp-to-place task with a verbal working memory task. Participants planned a placing movement toward one of two target positions and subsequently encoded and maintained visually presented letters. Both experiments revealed that re-planning the intended action reduced letter recall performance; execution time, however, was not influenced by action modifications. The results of Experiment 2 suggest that the actions interference with verbal working memory arose during the planning rather than the execution phase of the movement. Together, our results strongly suggest that movement planning and verbal working memory share common cognitive resources.

Corrections in grasp posture in response to modifications of action goals

There is ample evidence that people plan their movements to ensure comfortable final grasp postures at the end of a movement. The end-state comfort effect has been found to be a robust constraint during unimanual movements, and leads to the inference that goal-postures are represented and planned prior to movement initiation. The purpose of this study was to examine whether individuals make appropriate corrections to ensure comfortable final goal postures when faced with an unexpected change in action goal. Participants reached for a horizontal cylinder and placed the left or right end of the object into the target disk. As soon as the participant began to move, a secondary stimuli was triggered, which indicated whether the intended action goal had changed or not. Confirming previous research, participants selected initial grasp postures that ensured end-state comfort during non-perturbed trials. In addition, participants made appropriate on-line corrections to their reach-to-grasp movements to ensure end-state comfort during perturbed trials. Corrections in grasp posture occurred early or late in the reach-to-grasp phase. The results indicate that individuals plan their movements to afford comfort at the end of the movement, and that grasp posture planning is controlled via both feedforward and feedback mechanisms.