File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: On the relation between action selection and movement control in 5- to 9-month-old infants

TitleOn the relation between action selection and movement control in 5- to 9-month-old infants
Authors
KeywordsBiomedicine
Neurosciences
Neurology
Issue Date2011
PublisherSpringer Berlin / Heidelberg
Citation
Experimental Brain Research, 2011, v. 211, n. 1, p. 51-62 How to Cite?
Abstract
Although 5-month-old infants select action modes that are adaptive to the size of the object (i.e., one- or two-handed reaching), it has largely remained unclear whether infants of this age control the ensuing movement to the size of the object (i.e., scaling of the aperture between hands). We examined 5-, 7-, and 9-month-olds' reaching behaviors to gain more insight into the developmental changes occurring in the visual guidance of action mode selection and movement control, and the relationship between these processes. Infants were presented with a small set of objects (i.e., 2, 3, 7, and 8 cm) and a large set of objects (i.e., 6, 9, 12, and 15 cm). For the first set of objects, it was found that the infants more often performed two-handed reaches for the larger objects based on visual information alone (i.e., before making contact with the object), thus showing adaptive action mode selection relative to object size. Kinematical analyses of the two-handed reaches for the second set of objects revealed that inter-trial variance in aperture between the hands decreased with the approach toward the object, indicating that infants' reaching is constrained by the object. Subsequent analysis showed that between hand aperture scaled to object size, indicating that visual control of the movement is adjusted to object size in infants as young as 5 months. Individual analyses indicated that the two processes were not dependent and followed distinct developmental trajectories. That is, adaptive selection of an action mode was not a prerequisite for appropriate aperture scaling, and vice versa. These findings are consistent with the idea of two separate and independent visual systems (Milner and Goodale in Neuropsychologia 46:774-785, 2008) during early infancy. © 2011 The Author(s).
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/145059
ISSN
2013 Impact Factor: 2.168
PubMed Central ID
ISI Accession Number ID
References

Barrett TM, Traupman E, Needham A (2008) Infants’ visual anticipation of object structure in grasp planning. Infant Behav Dev 31:1–9 doi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2007.05.004

Bertenthal BI (1996) Origins and early development of perception, action, and representation. Annu Rev Psychol 47:431–459 doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.47.1.431

Bootsma RJ, van Wieringen PC (1990) Timing an attacking forehand drive in table tennis. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 16:21–29 doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.16.1.21

Bruner JS, Koslowski B (1972) Visually preadapted constituents of manipulatory action. Perception 1:3–14 doi: 10.1068/p010003

Bushnell EW (1985) The decline of visually guided reaching during infancy. Infant Behav Dev 8:139–155 doi: 10.1016/S0163-6383(85)80002-3

Corbetta D, Snapp-Childs W (2009) Seeing and touching: the role of sensory-motor experience on the development of infant reaching. Infant Behav Dev 32:44–58 doi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2008.10.004

Corbetta D, Thelen E (1996) The development origins of bimanual coordination: a dynamic perspective. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 22:502–522 doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.22.2.502

Corbetta D, Thelen E, Johnson K (2000) Motor constraints on the development of perception-action matching in infant reaching. Infant Behav Dev 23:351–371 doi: 10.1016/S0163-6383(01)00049-2

Crajé C, van der Kamp J, Steenbergen B (2008) The effect of the “rod-and-frame” illusion on grip planning in a sequential object manipulation task. Exp Brain Res 185:53–62 doi: 10.1007/s00221-007-1130-x

Dijkerman HC, McIntosh RD, Schindler I, Nijboer TCW, Milner AD (2009) Choosing between alternative wrist postures: action planning needs perception. Neuropsychologia 47:1476–1482 doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.12.002

Fagard J (2000) Linked proximal and distal changes in the reaching behavior of 5-to 12-month-old human infants grasping objects of different sizes. Infant Behav Dev 23:317–329 doi: 10.1016/S0163-6383(01)00047-9

Fagard J, Pezé A (1997) Age changes in interlimb coupling and the development of bimanual coordination. J Motor Behav 29:199–208 doi: 10.1080/00222899709600835

Gesell A (1946) The ontogenesis of infant behavior. In: Carmichael L (ed) Manual of child psychology. Wiley, New York, pp 295–331 doi: 10.1037/10756-006

Hesse C, Deubel H (2009) Changes in grasping kinematics due to different start postures of the hand. Hum Mov Sci 28:415–436 doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2009.03.001

Kuypers HGJM (1962) Corticospinal connections: postnatal development in the rhesus monkey. Science 138:678–680 doi: 10.1126/science.138.3541.678

Lee MH, Liu YT, Newell KM (2006) Longitudinal expressions of infant’s prehension as a function of object properties. Infant Behav Dev 29:481–493 doi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.05.004

Marteniuk RG, Leavitt JL, MacKenzie CL, Athenes S (1990) Functional relationships between grasp and transport components in a prehension task. Hum Mov Sci 9:149–176 doi: 10.1016/0167-9457(90)90025-9

Milner AD, Goodale MA (2008) Two visual systems re-viewed. Neuropsychologia 46:774–785 doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.10.005

Newell KM, Scully DM, McDonald PV, Baillargeon R (1989a) Task constraints and infant grip configurations. Dev Psychobiol 22:817–831 doi: 10.1002/dev.420220806

Newell KM, Scully DM, Tenenbaum F, Hardiman S (1989b) Body scale and the development of prehension. Dev Psychobiol 22:1–13 doi: 10.1002/dev.420220102

Newell KM, McDonald PV, Baillargeon R (1993) Body scale and infant grip configurations. Dev Psychobiol 26:195–205 doi: 10.1002/dev.420260403

Newman C, Atkinson J, Braddick O (2001) The development of reaching and looking preferences in infants to objects of different sizes. Dev Psychol 37:561–572 doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.37.4.561

Rosenbaum DA, Vaughan J, Barnes HJ, Jorgensen MJ (1992) Time course of movement planning: selection of hand grips for object manipulation. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 18:1058–1073 doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.18.5.1058

Schot WD, Brenner E, Smeets JB (2010) Robust movement segmentation by combining multiple sources of information. J Neurosci Methods 187:147–155 doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.01.004

Siddiqui A (1995) Object size as a determinant of grasping in infancy. J Genet Psychol 156:345–358 doi: 10.1080/00221325.1995.9914828

Stelmach GE, Castiello U, Jeannerod M (1994) Orienting the finger opposition space during prehension movements. J Motor Behav 26:178–186 doi: 10.1080/00222895.1994.9941672

Timmann D, Stelmach GE, Bloedel JR (1996) Grasping component alterations and limb transport. Exp Brain Res 108:486–492 doi: 10.1007/BF00227271

Tresilian JR, Stelmach GE (1997) Common organization for unimanual and bimanual reach-to-grasp tasks. Exp Brain Res 115:283–299 doi: 10.1007/PL00005697

van der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJP (2000) Action and perception in infancy. Infant Behav Dev 23:237–251 doi: 10.1016/S0163-6383(01)00071-6

van der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJP, Davis WE (1998) Body-scaled ratio as a control parameter for prehension in 5- to 9-year-old children. Dev Psychobiol 33:351–361 doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2302(199812)33:4%3C351::AID-DEV6%3E3.0.CO;2-P

van Doorn H, van der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJ (2007) Grasping the Muller-Lyer illusion: the contributions of vision for perception in action. Neuropsychologia 45:1939–1947 doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.11.008

van Hof P, van der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJP (2002) The relation of unimanual and bimanual reaching to crossing the midline. Child Dev 73:1353–1362 doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00476

van Hof P, van der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJP (2008) The relation between infants’ perception of catchableness and the control of catching. Dev Psychol 44:182–194 doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.44.1.182

van Soest AJ, Beek PJ (2010) Similar findings, different interpretations: a response to the commentary by Bootsma (2010). J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 36:1064–1066 doi: 10.1037/a0020059

van Wermeskerken M, van der Kamp J, te Velde AF, Valero-Garcia AV, Hoozemans MJM, Savelsbergh GJP (2011) Anticipatory reaching of seven- to eleven-month-old infants in occlusion situations. Infant Behav Dev 34:45–54 doi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2010.09.005

von Hofsten C, Fazel-Zandy S (1984) Development of visually guided hand orientation in reaching. J Exp Child Psychol 38:208–219 doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(84)90122-X

von Hofsten C, Roennqvist L (1988) Preparation for grasping an object: a developmental study. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 14:610–621 doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.14.4.610

Wallace SA, Weeks DL, Kelso JAS (1990) Temporal constraints in reaching and grasping behavior. Hum Mov Sci 9:69–93 doi: 10.1016/0167-9457(90)90036-D

Warren WH, Whang S (1987) Visual guidance of walking through apertures: body scaled information for affordances. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 13:371–383 doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.13.3.371

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorvan Wermeskerken, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorvan der Kamp, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorSavelsbergh, GJPen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-02-21T05:44:32Z-
dc.date.available2012-02-21T05:44:32Z-
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.identifier.citationExperimental Brain Research, 2011, v. 211, n. 1, p. 51-62en_US
dc.identifier.issn0014-4819en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/145059-
dc.description.abstractAlthough 5-month-old infants select action modes that are adaptive to the size of the object (i.e., one- or two-handed reaching), it has largely remained unclear whether infants of this age control the ensuing movement to the size of the object (i.e., scaling of the aperture between hands). We examined 5-, 7-, and 9-month-olds' reaching behaviors to gain more insight into the developmental changes occurring in the visual guidance of action mode selection and movement control, and the relationship between these processes. Infants were presented with a small set of objects (i.e., 2, 3, 7, and 8 cm) and a large set of objects (i.e., 6, 9, 12, and 15 cm). For the first set of objects, it was found that the infants more often performed two-handed reaches for the larger objects based on visual information alone (i.e., before making contact with the object), thus showing adaptive action mode selection relative to object size. Kinematical analyses of the two-handed reaches for the second set of objects revealed that inter-trial variance in aperture between the hands decreased with the approach toward the object, indicating that infants' reaching is constrained by the object. Subsequent analysis showed that between hand aperture scaled to object size, indicating that visual control of the movement is adjusted to object size in infants as young as 5 months. Individual analyses indicated that the two processes were not dependent and followed distinct developmental trajectories. That is, adaptive selection of an action mode was not a prerequisite for appropriate aperture scaling, and vice versa. These findings are consistent with the idea of two separate and independent visual systems (Milner and Goodale in Neuropsychologia 46:774-785, 2008) during early infancy. © 2011 The Author(s).en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSpringer Berlin / Heidelbergen_US
dc.relation.ispartofExperimental Brain Researchen_US
dc.rightsThe Author(s)en_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong Licenseen_US
dc.subjectBiomedicineen_US
dc.subjectNeurosciencesen_US
dc.subjectNeurologyen_US
dc.titleOn the relation between action selection and movement control in 5- to 9-month-old infantsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4551/resserv?sid=springerlink&genre=article&atitle=On the relation between action selection and movement control in 5- to 9-month-old infants&title=Experimental Brain Research&issn=00144819&date=2011-05-01&volume=211&issue=1& spage=51&authors=Margot van Wermeskerken, John van der Kamp, Geert J. P. Savelsberghen_US
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_versionen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00221-011-2645-8en_US
dc.identifier.pmid21461601-
dc.identifier.pmcidPMC3084940-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-79958249702en_US
dc.relation.referencesBarrett TM, Traupman E, Needham A (2008) Infants’ visual anticipation of object structure in grasp planning. Infant Behav Dev 31:1–9en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2007.05.004en_US
dc.relation.referencesBertenthal BI (1996) Origins and early development of perception, action, and representation. Annu Rev Psychol 47:431–459en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.47.1.431en_US
dc.relation.referencesBootsma RJ, van Wieringen PC (1990) Timing an attacking forehand drive in table tennis. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 16:21–29en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/0096-1523.16.1.21en_US
dc.relation.referencesBruner JS, Koslowski B (1972) Visually preadapted constituents of manipulatory action. Perception 1:3–14en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1068/p010003en_US
dc.relation.referencesBushnell EW (1985) The decline of visually guided reaching during infancy. Infant Behav Dev 8:139–155en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/S0163-6383(85)80002-3en_US
dc.relation.referencesCorbetta D, Snapp-Childs W (2009) Seeing and touching: the role of sensory-motor experience on the development of infant reaching. Infant Behav Dev 32:44–58en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2008.10.004en_US
dc.relation.referencesCorbetta D, Thelen E (1996) The development origins of bimanual coordination: a dynamic perspective. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 22:502–522en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/0096-1523.22.2.502en_US
dc.relation.referencesCorbetta D, Thelen E, Johnson K (2000) Motor constraints on the development of perception-action matching in infant reaching. Infant Behav Dev 23:351–371en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/S0163-6383(01)00049-2en_US
dc.relation.referencesCrajé C, van der Kamp J, Steenbergen B (2008) The effect of the “rod-and-frame” illusion on grip planning in a sequential object manipulation task. Exp Brain Res 185:53–62en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/s00221-007-1130-xen_US
dc.relation.referencesDijkerman HC, McIntosh RD, Schindler I, Nijboer TCW, Milner AD (2009) Choosing between alternative wrist postures: action planning needs perception. Neuropsychologia 47:1476–1482en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.12.002en_US
dc.relation.referencesFagard J (2000) Linked proximal and distal changes in the reaching behavior of 5-to 12-month-old human infants grasping objects of different sizes. Infant Behav Dev 23:317–329en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/S0163-6383(01)00047-9en_US
dc.relation.referencesFagard J, Pezé A (1997) Age changes in interlimb coupling and the development of bimanual coordination. J Motor Behav 29:199–208en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1080/00222899709600835en_US
dc.relation.referencesGesell A (1946) The ontogenesis of infant behavior. In: Carmichael L (ed) Manual of child psychology. Wiley, New York, pp 295–331en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/10756-006en_US
dc.relation.referencesGlover S (2004) Separate visual representations in the planning and control of action. Behav Brain Sci 27:3–78en_US
dc.relation.referencesHesse C, Deubel H (2009) Changes in grasping kinematics due to different start postures of the hand. Hum Mov Sci 28:415–436en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/j.humov.2009.03.001en_US
dc.relation.referencesKuypers HGJM (1962) Corticospinal connections: postnatal development in the rhesus monkey. Science 138:678–680en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1126/science.138.3541.678en_US
dc.relation.referencesLee MH, Liu YT, Newell KM (2006) Longitudinal expressions of infant’s prehension as a function of object properties. Infant Behav Dev 29:481–493en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.05.004en_US
dc.relation.referencesMarteniuk RG, Leavitt JL, MacKenzie CL, Athenes S (1990) Functional relationships between grasp and transport components in a prehension task. Hum Mov Sci 9:149–176en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/0167-9457(90)90025-9en_US
dc.relation.referencesMilner AD, Goodale MA (2008) Two visual systems re-viewed. Neuropsychologia 46:774–785en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.10.005en_US
dc.relation.referencesNewell KM, Scully DM, McDonald PV, Baillargeon R (1989a) Task constraints and infant grip configurations. Dev Psychobiol 22:817–831en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1002/dev.420220806en_US
dc.relation.referencesNewell KM, Scully DM, Tenenbaum F, Hardiman S (1989b) Body scale and the development of prehension. Dev Psychobiol 22:1–13en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1002/dev.420220102en_US
dc.relation.referencesNewell KM, McDonald PV, Baillargeon R (1993) Body scale and infant grip configurations. Dev Psychobiol 26:195–205en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1002/dev.420260403en_US
dc.relation.referencesNewman C, Atkinson J, Braddick O (2001) The development of reaching and looking preferences in infants to objects of different sizes. Dev Psychol 37:561–572en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/0012-1649.37.4.561en_US
dc.relation.referencesRosenbaum DA, Vaughan J, Barnes HJ, Jorgensen MJ (1992) Time course of movement planning: selection of hand grips for object manipulation. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 18:1058–1073en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/0278-7393.18.5.1058en_US
dc.relation.referencesSchot WD, Brenner E, Smeets JB (2010) Robust movement segmentation by combining multiple sources of information. J Neurosci Methods 187:147–155en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.01.004en_US
dc.relation.referencesSiddiqui A (1995) Object size as a determinant of grasping in infancy. J Genet Psychol 156:345–358en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1080/00221325.1995.9914828en_US
dc.relation.referencesSmeets JB, Brenner E (1999) A new view on grasping. Mot Control 3:237–271en_US
dc.relation.referencesStelmach GE, Castiello U, Jeannerod M (1994) Orienting the finger opposition space during prehension movements. J Motor Behav 26:178–186en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1080/00222895.1994.9941672en_US
dc.relation.referencesTimmann D, Stelmach GE, Bloedel JR (1996) Grasping component alterations and limb transport. Exp Brain Res 108:486–492en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/BF00227271en_US
dc.relation.referencesTresilian JR, Stelmach GE (1997) Common organization for unimanual and bimanual reach-to-grasp tasks. Exp Brain Res 115:283–299en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1007/PL00005697en_US
dc.relation.referencesvan der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJP (2000) Action and perception in infancy. Infant Behav Dev 23:237–251en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/S0163-6383(01)00071-6en_US
dc.relation.referencesvan der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJP, Davis WE (1998) Body-scaled ratio as a control parameter for prehension in 5- to 9-year-old children. Dev Psychobiol 33:351–361en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2302(199812)33:4%3C351::AID-DEV6%3E3.0.CO;2-Pen_US
dc.relation.referencesvan Doorn H, van der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJ (2007) Grasping the Muller-Lyer illusion: the contributions of vision for perception in action. Neuropsychologia 45:1939–1947en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.11.008en_US
dc.relation.referencesvan Hof P, van der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJP (2002) The relation of unimanual and bimanual reaching to crossing the midline. Child Dev 73:1353–1362en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00476en_US
dc.relation.referencesvan Hof P, van der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJP (2008) The relation between infants’ perception of catchableness and the control of catching. Dev Psychol 44:182–194en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/0012-1649.44.1.182en_US
dc.relation.referencesvan Soest AJ, Beek PJ (2010) Similar findings, different interpretations: a response to the commentary by Bootsma (2010). J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 36:1064–1066en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/a0020059en_US
dc.relation.referencesvan Wermeskerken M, van der Kamp J, te Velde AF, Valero-Garcia AV, Hoozemans MJM, Savelsbergh GJP (2011) Anticipatory reaching of seven- to eleven-month-old infants in occlusion situations. Infant Behav Dev 34:45–54en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2010.09.005en_US
dc.relation.referencesvon Hofsten C, Fazel-Zandy S (1984) Development of visually guided hand orientation in reaching. J Exp Child Psychol 38:208–219en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/0022-0965(84)90122-Xen_US
dc.relation.referencesvon Hofsten C, Roennqvist L (1988) Preparation for grasping an object: a developmental study. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 14:610–621en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/0096-1523.14.4.610en_US
dc.relation.referencesWallace SA, Weeks DL, Kelso JAS (1990) Temporal constraints in reaching and grasping behavior. Hum Mov Sci 9:69–93en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1016/0167-9457(90)90036-Den_US
dc.relation.referencesWarren WH, Whang S (1987) Visual guidance of walking through apertures: body scaled information for affordances. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 13:371–383en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1037/0096-1523.13.3.371en_US
dc.relation.referencesAtkinson J (2000) The developing visual brain. Oxford University Press, Oxforden_US
dc.relation.referencesHalverson HM (1931) An experimental study of prehension in infants by means of systematic cinema records. Genetic Psychol Monogr 10:107–286en_US
dc.relation.referencesJeannerod M (1981) Intersegmental coordination during reaching at natural visual objects. In: Long J, Baddeley A (eds) Attention and performance, IX. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 153–168en_US
dc.relation.referencesKuypers HGJM (1982) A new look at the organization of the motor system. In: Kuypers HGJM, Martin GF (eds) Progress in brain research, vol. 57. Descending pathways to the spinal cord. Elsevier Biomedical, Amsterdam, pp 381–404en_US
dc.relation.referencesNewell KM (1986) Constraints on the development of action. In: Wade MG, Whiting HTA (eds) Motor development in children: aspects of coordination and control. Martinus-Nijhoff, Dordrecht, pp 341–360en_US
dc.relation.referencesvan der Kamp J, Rivas F, van Doorn H, Savelsbergh G (2008) Ventral and dorsal system contributions to visual anticipation in fast ball sports. Int J Sport Psychol 39:100–130en_US
dc.relation.referencesvan Wermeskerken M, van der Kamp J, Savelsbergh GJP (2010) The early development of the use of visual information for action and perception. In: Elliott D, Khan M (eds) Vision and goal-directed movement: neurobehavioral perspectives. Human Kinetics, Champaign, pp 293–313en_US
dc.relation.referencesWoodworth RS (1899) The accuracy of voluntary movements. Psychol Rev Monogr 3:1–119en_US
dc.identifier.volume211en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.spage51en_US
dc.identifier.epage62en_US
dc.identifier.eissn1432-1106en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000290036900005-
dc.description.otherSpringer Open Choice, 21 Feb 2012en_US
dc.identifier.citeulike9106524-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats