Timing of bimanual movements and deafferentation: implications for the role of 
sensory movement effects

Drewing, K; Stenneken , P; Cole, J; Prinz, W; Aschersleben, G

doi:10.1007/s00221-004-1870-9

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Add to Basket

Local TagsRelease HistoryDetailsSummary

Released

Journal Article

Timing of bimanual movements and deafferentation: implications for the role of sensory movement effects

MPS-Authors

/persons/resource/persons84862

Drewing, K
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

External Resource

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs00221-004-1870-9.pdf
(Publisher version)

Fulltext (restricted access)

There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.

Fulltext (public)

There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe

Supplementary Material (public)

There is no public supplementary material available

Citation

Drewing, K., Stenneken, P., Cole, J., Prinz, W., & Aschersleben, G. (2004). Timing of bimanual movements and deafferentation: implications for the role of sensory movement effects. Experimental Brain Research, 158(1), 50-57. doi:10.1007/s00221-004-1870-9.

Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-F3B1-B

Abstract

In a repetitive tapping task, the within-hand variability of intertap intervals is reduced when participants tap with both hands instead of single-handedly. This bimanual advantage has been attributed to timer as opposed to motor variance (according to the Wing-Kristofferson model; Helmuth and Ivry 1996) and related to the additional sensory consequences of the movement of the extra hand in the bimanual case (Drewing et al. 2002). In the present study the effect of sensory feedback of the movement on this advantage was investigated by comparing the results of a person (IW) deafferented below the neck with those of age-matched controls. IW showed an even more pronounced bimanual advantage than controls, suggesting that the bimanual advantage is not due to actual sensory feedback. These results support another hypothesis, namely that bimanual timing profits from the averaging of different central control signals that relate to each effector’s movements.