Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T23:15:27.973Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evidence from optic ataxia does not support a distinction between planning and control mechanisms in human motor control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2004

Roger Newport*
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG13 8DB, United Kingdomhttp://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/rwn/http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/lpxslp/http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/srj/
Sally Pears*
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG13 8DB, United Kingdomhttp://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/rwn/http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/lpxslp/http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/srj/
Stephen R. Jackson*
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG13 8DB, United Kingdomhttp://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/rwn/http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/lpxslp/http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/srj/

Abstract:

Evidence from optic ataxic patients with bilateral lesions to the superior parietal lobes does not support the view that there are separate planning and control mechanisms located in the IPL and SPL respectively. The aberrant reaches of patients with bilateral SPL damage towards extrafoveal targets seem to suggest a deficit in the selection of appropriate motor programmes rather than a deficit restricted to on-line control.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)