Introduction: Patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) are known to have decision-making impairments in tasks involving probabilistic information. How PD patients utilize task-relevant probabilistic advance information to plan and initiate common motor tasks like grasping has not yet been studied.
Methods: PD patients (n = 15, OFF medication) and control participants repeatedly grasped and lifted an object, the weight of which could be light, medium, or heavy. Visual cues provided explicit probabilistic information about the upcoming weight at the start of each grip-lift trial. This information allows the force of the grasping fingers to be scaled predictively so that it matches the likely weight, with a suitable rate of initial force increase. Deterministic cues announced the upcoming weight with certainty in other grip-lift trials. In a weight adjustment experiment, participants associated each probabilistic cue with a specific heaviness.
Results: The weight adjustment experiments showed that the probabilistic cues were understood correctly. However, PD patients utilized the probabilistic information significantly less than controls during the grip-lift task. Specifically, patients did not initiate their grasp more forcefully when probabilistic cues announced a high likelihood (66.7% probability) of a heavy weight, in contrast to controls. Thus, probabilistic cues that encouraged a more vigorous action had no effect in PD. Nevertheless, patients and controls scaled their forces appropriately when deterministic cues announced the forthcoming weights unambiguously.
Conclusions: PD patients do not invest a high movement effort to initiate a grip-lift unless the necessity of such a vigorous action initiation is decidedly clear.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.parkreldis.2019.05.015 | DOI Listing |
PLoS One
October 2024
Division General Psychology and Neuropsychology, Department of Education and Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Distractor-induced blindness (DIB) describes a reduced access to a cued visual target-if multiple target-like distractors have been presented beforehand. Previous ERP data suggest a cumulative frontal inhibition triggered by distractors, which affects the updating process of the upcoming target. In the present study, we examine whether the modality of the cue-formerly defined in the visual domain-affects the expression of these neural signatures.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPsychophysiology
December 2024
Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Dortmund, Germany.
J Neurosci
September 2024
Neuroscience Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213
The frontal eye field (FEF) plays a well-established role in the control of visual attention. The strength of an FEF neuron's response to a visual stimulus presented in its receptive field is enhanced if the stimulus captures spatial attention by virtue of its salience. A stimulus can be rendered salient by cognitive factors as well as by physical attributes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInfancy
August 2024
Department of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany.
This study aimed to assess which action component (movement or goal) infants prioritize in their imitation behavior when they get information about its relevance from two important sources: perceptual goal saliency and experimenter's verbal information. 16- to 18-month-olds (N = 72) observed how the experimenter moved a toy mouse with a hopping or sliding movement onto one of two empty spaces (low goal saliency) or 2D circles (medium saliency), or inside one of two 3D houses (high saliency). Before the demonstration, the experimenter verbally announced the movement style or the goal.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFHealth Commun
April 2024
College of Journalism and Communications, University of Florida.
Algorithms are now playing significant roles in online health information selection and recommendation. A question arises as to when and why people would be persuaded by the content they recommend. We conducted a 4 (recommending source: algorithm, other users, a friend, the CDC) x 2 (language intensity: high vs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!