How automatic is the hand's automatic pilot? Evidence from dual-task studies.
The ability to correct reaching movements for changes in target position has been described as the hand's 'automatic pilot'. These corrections are preconscious and occur by default in double-step reaching tasks, even if the goal is to react to the target jump in some other way, for instance by stopping the movement (STOP instruction). Nonetheless, corrections are strongly modulated by conscious intention: participants make more corrections when asked to follow the target (GO instruction) and can suppress them when explicitly asked not to follow the target (NOGO instruction). We studied the influence of a cognitively demanding (auditory 1-back) task upon correction behaviour under GO, STOP and NOGO instructions. Correction rates under the STOP instruction were unaffected by cognitive load, consistent with the assumption that they reflect the default behaviour of the automatic pilot. Correction rates under the GO instruction were also unaffected, suggesting that minimal cognitive resources are required to enhance online correction. By contrast, cognitive load impeded the ability to suppress online corrections under the NOGO instruction. These data reveal a constitutional bias in the automatic pilot system: intentional suppression of the default correction behaviour is cognitively demanding, but enhancement towards greater responsiveness is seemingly effortless.
McIntosh
Robert D
RD
Human Cognitive Neuroscience, Psychology, University of Edinburgh, 7 George Square, Edinburgh, UK. r.d.mcintosh@ed.ac.uk
Mulroue
Amy
A
Brockmole
James R
JR
D003243:Consciousness / Q000502:physiology*; D056344:Executive Function / Q000502:physiology; D005260:Female; D006225:Hand / Q000294:innervation / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009068:Movement / Q000502:physiology*; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests / Q000592:standards; D011597:Psychomotor Performance / Q000502:physiology*; D012018:Reflex / Q000502:physiology*; D013647:Task Performance and Analysis; D014473:Unconscious, Psychology; D055815:Young Adult
Vision Res. 2005 Jul;45(15):1921-7
15820510
Exp Brain Res. 2001 Aug;139(3):333-44
11545472
Exp Brain Res. 2000 Jan;130(2):159-68
10672469
Exp Brain Res. 2004 Apr;155(3):320-33
14726987
Psychon Bull Rev. 2005 Aug;12(4):662-8
16447379
Brain. 1991 Dec;114 ( Pt 6):2639-55
1782536
Exp Brain Res. 1999 Jul;127(2):207-12
10442412
Nat Neurosci. 1999 Jun;2(6):563-7
10448222
Conscious Cogn. 2009 Sep;18(3):646-52
19454371
Exp Brain Res. 1986;62(2):303-11
3709715
Q J Exp Psychol A. 1998 May;51(2):225-49
9621840
Neuropsychologia. 2002;40(13):2471-80
12417474
Nature. 1986 Apr 24-30;320(6064):748-50
3703000
J Mot Behav. 1997 Dec;29(4):297-310
12453772
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2005 Jun;119(2):123-42
15877977
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1988 Jan;14(1):126-35
2963892
Nat Neurosci. 2000 Jul;3(7):729-36
10862707
Exp Brain Res. 2006 May;171(2):174-83
16307249
Exp Brain Res. 2010 May;202(3):623-32
20135102
Q J Exp Psychol A. 2004 Aug;57(6):1031-57
15370515
Exp Brain Res. 1985;60(1):159-78
4043274
Exp Brain Res. 2002 Oct;146(4):451-9
12355273
Exp Brain Res. 2007 Aug;181(2):297-305
17375290