Abstract
Actions we perform every day generate perceivable outcomes with both spatial and temporal features. According to the ideomotor principle, we plan our actions by anticipating the outcomes, but this principle does not directly address how sequential movements are influenced by different outcomes. We examined how sequential action planning is influenced by the anticipation of temporal and spatial features of action outcomes. We further explored the influence of action sequence switching. Participants performed cued sequences of button presses that generated visual effects which were either spatially compatible or incompatible with the sequences, and the spatial effects appeared after a short or long delay. The sequence cues switched or repeated across trials, and the predictability of action sequence switches was varied across groups. The results showed a delay-anticipation effect for sequential action, whereby a shorter anticipated delay between action sequences and their outcomes speeded initiation and execution of the cued action sequences. Delay anticipation was increased by predictable action switching, but it was not strongly modified by the spatial compatibility of the action outcomes. The results extend previous demonstrations of delay anticipation to the context of sequential action. The temporal delay between actions and their outcomes appears to be retrieved for sequential planning and influences both the initiation and the execution of actions.
Highlights
Voluntary action involves using body movements to effect perceivable changes in the environment
We investigate whether sequential action planning is influenced by the anticipation of temporal or spatial features of action effects
We tested whether temporal and spatial features of action effects are retrieved and utilized in sequential action control, and whether temporal or spatial effect anticipation is influenced by higher-order planning
Summary
Voluntary action involves using body movements to effect perceivable changes in the environment. Because our actions are outcome-directed, the memory trace or anticipation of the outcomes may function to control the actions that produced them. This notion is articulated by the ideomotor principle (James, 1890). According to this principle, actions are preceded by anticipating their perceived consequences (e.g., Greenwald, 1970; Pfister, 2019; Shin et al, 2010). Actions are preceded by anticipating their perceived consequences (e.g., Greenwald, 1970; Pfister, 2019; Shin et al, 2010) This principle has been useful for unifying a wide range of evidence for perception–action integration in the planning of actions.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call