Abstract
Recent research has suggested that visual discrimination and detection may be enhanced during movement preparation and execution, respectively. The current study examined if visual perceptual processing is augmented prior to or during a movement through the use of an Inspection Time (IT) task. The IT task involved briefly presenting (e.g., 15–105 ms) a “pi” figure with differing leg lengths, which was then immediately masked for 400 ms to prevent retinal afterimages. Participants were subsequently required to choose which of the two legs was longer. In Experiment 1, participants (n = 28) completed the IT task under three movement conditions: no-movement (NM), foreperiod (FP), and peak velocity (PV). In the NM condition, participants solely engaged in the IT paradigm. In the FP condition, the IT stimulus was presented prior to movement execution when response planning was expected to occur. Finally, in the PV condition, participants made a rapid movement to a target, and the IT stimulus was presented when their limb reached peak velocity. In Experiment 2, participants (n = 18) also performed the IT task in the PV and NM condition; however, vision of the limb’s motion was made available during the PV trials (PV-FV) to investigate the potential influence of visual feedback on IT performance. Results showed no significant differences in performance in the IT task between the NM and FP conditions, suggesting no enhancement of visual processing occurred due to response preparation (Experiment 1). However, IT performance was significantly poorer in the PV condition in comparison to both the NM and FP conditions (Experiment 1), and was even worse when visual feedback was provided (Experiment 2). Together, these findings suggest that visual perceptual processing is degraded during execution of a fast, goal-directed movement.
Highlights
In their seminal work, Goodale and Milner [1] showed that vision for perception is processed differently and via a separate pathway compared to vision for action
An unpublished study by Goodman and Tremblay [5] found that participants were less likely to report the correct number of flashes in a visual flash detection task without a concurrent acoustic stimulus when the limb was moving at peak-limb velocity, a follow-up study confirmed a diminished suceptibility to the audio-visual fusion illusion at peak-limb velocity, and included a condition where there was no movement [6].These results suggested that either 1) the speed of visual perceptual processing was enhanced when visual information was important for limb regulation, or 2) multi-modal stimulus processing was improved during limb movement [3]
Post-hoc pairwise comparisons between conditions showed that the percentage of correct responses was significantly lower in the peak velocity (PV) condition compared to both the NM (p = .002) and FP (p = .006) conditions
Summary
Goodale and Milner [1] showed that vision for perception is processed differently and via a separate pathway compared to vision for action. Goodale and Milner’s dual systems model suggests that visual information used to guide movements online is processed by a dorsal visual stream, whereas visual perceptual processing occurs predominantly via a much slower ventral visual stream. Diminished visual processing during movement design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
