title: Mice move smoothly: irrelevant object variation affects perception, but not computer mouse actions.
abstract: Human-Computer Interactions pose special demands on the motor system, especially regarding the virtual tool transformations underlying typical mouse movements. We investigated whether such virtual tool-transformed movements are similarly resistant to irrelevant variation of a target object as skilled natural movements are. Results show that such irrelevant information deteriorates performance in perceptual tasks, whereas movement parameters remain unaffected, suggesting that the control of virtual tools draws on the same mechanisms as natural actions do. The results are discussed in terms of their practical utility and recent findings investigating unskilled and transformed movements in the framework of the action/perception model and the integration of tools into the body schema.
authors: Department of Psychology III, University of Würzburg, Röntgenring 11, 97070, Würzburg, Germany, markus.janczyk@uni-wuerzburg.de.
authors: Markus
authors: M
authors: Janczyk
authors: Roland
authors: R
authors: Pfister
authors: Wilfried
authors: W
authors: Kunde
mesh_terms: D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D003201:Computers; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D005260:Female; D007839:Functional Laterality / Q000502:physiology; D018737:Hand Strength / Q000502:physiology; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009068:Movement / Q000502:physiology; D010465:Perception / Q000502:physiology*; D010775:Photic Stimulation; D011597:Psychomotor Performance / Q000502:physiology; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D014584:User-Computer Interface; D014796:Visual Perception / Q000502:physiology; D055815:Young Adult
references: Neuropsychologia. 2010 Oct;48(12):3405-15
references: 20599441
references: Nature. 2003 Dec 11;426(6967):664-7
references: 14668865
references: Cogn Neuropsychol. 2008 Oct;25(7):920-50
references: 18629739
references: Neuroreport. 2000 Jun 5;11(8):1645-9
references: 10852217
references: Cogn Neuropsychol. 2008 Oct-Dec;25(7-8):891-919
references: 18608333
references: PLoS One. 2010 May 12;5(5):e10564
references: 20485681
references: Front Hum Neurosci. 2008 Aug 20;2:6
references: 18958207
references: Trends Neurosci. 1992 Jan;15(1):20-5
references: 1374953
references: Trends Cogn Sci. 2009 Aug;13(8):360-6
references: 19647475
references: Neuropsychologia. 2008 Jan 31;46(2):624-31
references: 17950763
references: Neurosci Res. 2001 Jun;40(2):163-73
references: 11377755
references: Cogn Neuropsychol. 2008 Oct-Dec;25(7-8):985-95
references: 18608330
references: Adv Cogn Psychol. 2013 Jun 17;9(2):74-80
references: 23826038
references: J Exp Psychol Appl. 2000 Dec;6(4):291-306
references: 11218339
references: Nature. 1998 Feb 19;391(6669):756
references: 9486643
references: Psychon Bull Rev. 2012 Jun;19(3):412-7
references: 22430487
references: Front Psychol. 2011 Apr 20;2:59
references: 21687437
references: Curr Biol. 1995 Jun 1;5(6):679-85
references: 7552179
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2005 Oct;31(5):880-8
references: 16262485
references: Psychol Sci. 2007 Feb;18(2):100-4
references: 17425526
references: J Neurophysiol. 2006 Jun;95(6):3496-501
references: 16495359
references: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2008 Nov;137(4):673-90
references: 18999360
references: Neuroreport. 1996 Oct 2;7(14):2325-30
references: 8951846
references: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1978 Sep;107(3):287-308
references: 690574
references: Exp Brain Res. 2010 May;203(1):89-100
references: 20333368