Error correction timing behavior in tapping and circle drawing

Breanna Erin Studenka, Purdue University

Abstract

Two different mechanisms for interval timing have been proposed, one requiring a cognitive representation of time for control of interval production (event timing), and another in which time is not directly controlled, but results from the control of movement (emergent timing; Robertson et al., 1999; Spencer et al., 2003; Zelaznik et al., 2005). Although empirical support for the event-emergent timing distinction comes from self-paced interval production, the same timing mechanisms were expected to exist for synchronization. Many tasks require that an individual entrain to an external signal (e.g., musicians to a conductor and marching soldiers to a drill sergeant). This synchronization behavior has been well studied in tapping. If the external timer produces a shorter or a longer than expected interval, the performer makes a rapid adjustment, called a phase correction (Repp, 2000, 2001a). This correction occurs even when the participant is not aware of the perturbed interval. Synchronization behavior has been less well studied for repetitive circle drawing, an emergent timekeeping task. In Experiment 1, 16 participants performed 2 tasks, tapping and circle drawing, for 136 trials each. A trial involved 7 intervals of synchronization (period of 500 ms), 10 intervals without the metronome and, finally, 10 intervals synchronized again with the metronome. The 4th, 5th, or 6th metronome interval during the second synchronization portion was shortened or lengthened by either 25 or 100 ms. Participants did not have trouble maintaining the appropriate pace while in the circle drawing task, but did have trouble staying synchronized with an external sequence of tones, whereas, the synchronization tapping task utilized rapid correction strategies. In Experiment 2, the nature of feedback at the timing target was manipulated. A feedback event was inserted (or not) at the spatial timing goal. Twelve participants performed the circle drawing task with and without events. Twelve participants performed the tapping task with and without events. The main research objective was to determine if a feedback event in each interval helped participants keep pace and remain synchronized with an external rhythm. Timing accuracy was measured as the duration of time between a critical point in the interval trajectory (e.g., the finger contacting the table top) and the onset of the metronome tone. Participants corrected for perturbations more quickly and more completely when events were present. This was the case for a circle drawing condition in which participants passed the finger over a Velcro strip once per cycle even though the trajectory in the anterior posterior dimension did not change. These findings highlight the idea that events rather than movement smoothness dictate which timing process a person uses. As well, further support is given to the idea that different types of movement are timed differently, even when a metronome signal is present.

Degree

Ph.D.

Advisors

Zelaznik, Purdue University.

Subject Area

Behavioral psychology

COinS