Programming Time as a Function of Number of Movement Parts and Changes in Movement Direction

References

• Anson, J. G. (1982). Memory drum theory: Alternative tests and explanations for the complexity effects on simple reaction time. Journal of Motor Behavior, 14, 228–246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baba, D. M., & Marteniuk, R. G. (1983). Timing and torque involvement in the organization of a rapid forearm flexion. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 35A, 323–331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basmajian, J. V. (1974). Muscles alive (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
   Google Scholar
• Christina, R. W., Fischman, M. G., Vercruyssen, M. J. P., & Anson, J. G. (1982). Simple reaction time as a function of response complexity: Memory drum theory revisited. Journal of Motor Behavior, 14, 301–321.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falkenberg, L. E., & Newell, K. M. (1980). Relative contribution of movement time, amplitude, and velocity to response initiation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6, 760–768.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Games, P. A. (1974). The design of behavioral experiments with data analysis by analysis of variance. University Park, PA: Paul A. Games.
   Google Scholar
• Glencross, D. J. (1972). Latency and response complexity, Journal of Motor Behavior, 4, 251–256.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glencross, D. J. (1973). Response complexity and the latency of different movement patterns. Journal of Motor Behavior, 5, 95–104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glencross, D. J. (1980). Response planning and the organization of speed movements. In R. S. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 107–125). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Greenhouse, S. W., & Geisser, S. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 24, 95–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henry, F. M. (1961). Stimulus complexity, movement complexity, age, and sex in relation to reaction latency and speed in limb movements. Research Quarterly, 32, 353–366.
   Google Scholar
• Henry, F. M. (1980). Use of simple reaction time in motor programming studies: A reply to Klapp, Wyatt, & Lingo. Journal of Motor Behavior, 12, 237–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henry, F. M. (1981). The evolution of the memory drum theory of neuromotor reaction. In G. A. Brooks (Ed.), Perspectives on the academic discipline of physical education (pp. 301–322). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
   Google Scholar
• Henry, F. M., & Rogers, D. E. (1960). Increased response latency for complicated movements and a “memory drum” theory of neuromotor reaction. Research Quarterly, 31, 448–458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keele, S. W. (1981). Behavioral analysis of movement. In V. Brooks (Ed.), Motor control: Handbook of physiology (Vol. 2, pp. 1391–1414). Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
   Google Scholar
• Kerr, B. (1978). Task factors that influence selection and preparation for voluntary movements. In G. E. Stelmach (Ed.), Information processing in motor control and learning (pp. 55–69). New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Klapp, S. T. (1978). Reaction time analysis of programmed control. In R. S. Hutton (Ed.), Exercise and sport sciences reviews (pp. 231–253). Santa Barbara, CA: Journal Publishing Affiliates.
   Google Scholar
• Klapp, S. T. (1980). The memory drum theory after twenty years: Comments on Henry's note. Journal of Motor Behavior, 12, 169–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klapp, S. T. (1981). Motor programming is not the only process which can influence RT: Some thoughts on the Marteniuk and MacKenzie analysis. Journal of Motor Behavior, 13, 320–328.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klapp, S. T., Abbott, J., Coffman, K., Greim, D., Snider, R., & Young, F. (1979). Simple and choice reaction time methods in the study of motor programming. Journal of Motor Behavior, 11, 91–101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klapp, S. T., Wyatt, E. P., & Lingo, W. M. (1974). Response programming in simple and choice reactions. Journal of Motor Behavior, 6, 263–271.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marteniuk, R. G., & MacKenzie, C. L. (1981). Methods in the study of motor programming: Is it just a matter of simple vs. choice reaction time? A comment on Klapp et al. (1979). Journal of Motor Behavior, 13, 313–319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newell, K. M., Hoshizaki, L. E. F., Carlton, M. J., & Halbert, J. A. (1979). Movement time and velocity as determinants of movement timing accuracy. Journal of Motor Behavior, 11, 49–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norrie, M. L. (1967). Practice effects on reaction latency for simple and complex movements. Research Quarterly, 38, 79–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norrie, M. L. (1974). Effects of movement complexity on choice reaction and movement times. Research Quarterly, 45, 154–161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Connell, A. L., & Gardner, E. B. (1963). The use of electromyography in kinesiological research. Research Quarterly, 34, 166–184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn, J. T., Jr., Schmidt, R. A., Zelaznik, H. N., Hawkins, B., & McFarquhar, R. (1980). Target-size influences on reaction time with movement time controlled. Journal of Motor Behavior, 12, 239–261.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sternberg, S., Monsell, S., Knoll, R. L., & Wright, C. E. (1978). The latency and duration of rapid movement sequences: Comparisons of speech and typewriting. In G. E. Stelmach (Ed.), Information processing in motor control and learning (pp. 117–152). New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weiss, A. D. (1965). The locus of reaction time change with set, motivation, and age. Journal of Gerontology, 20, 60–64.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wrisberg, C. A., & Pushkin, M. H. (1976). Preparatory set, response complexity, and reaction latency. Journal of Motor Behavior, 8, 203–207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar