Poster B118, Sunday, March 26, 8:00 – 10:00 am, Pacific Concourse
Grasping Movement (Re-)planning Interferes with Working Memory during the Maintenance Process: An ERP Study
Rumeysa Gunduz Can1,2, Thomas Schack1,2,3, Dirk Koester1,2; 1Faculty of Psychology and Sport Science, Bielefeld University, Germany, 2Cognitive Interaction Technology - Center of Excellence, Bielefeld University, Germany, 3Research Institute for Cognition and Robotics, Bielefeld University, Germany
The present study focuses on the neurophysiological interactions of cognition, specifically working memory, and grasping movements. In particular, we investigated neuro-cognitive costs of implementing a new grasp plan for separate working memory (WM) domains (verbal, visuospatial) and processes (encoding, maintenance, retrieval). In a dual-task paradigm, 35 participants concurrently performed a WM task and grasp-to-place task (grasp a sphere and place it onto either the left or right motor target according to an arrow cue). For 30% of trials, grasping movement had to be re-planned online. This study employed a 2 (WM Task: Verbal vs. visuospatial) x 2 (Grasp Planning: Prepared vs. re-planned) within subject design. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were analyzed separately for encoding, maintenance, retrieval processes. Behavioral analyses showed that the memory performance decreased for both WM tasks when grasp re-planning was required. That is, grasp re-planning interferes with WM in domain-general pattern. ERP analyses showed for maintenance process that prepared trials elicited larger negative slow waves compared to re-planned trials regardless of WM task. That is, maintenance-related ERPs of verbal and visuospatial tasks were equally affected. There was no effect for encoding and retrieval processes. Therefore, ERP findings support the domain-general re-planning interference with WM. More importantly, for the first time, ERP findings show the process-specific (maintenance) re-planning interference at the neurophysiological level. The present study provides a better understanding of neuro-cognitive mechanisms of manual action flexibility, particularly focusing on ERPs during overt movement execution.
Topic Area: PERCEPTION & ACTION: Motor control