The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Influence of the behavioral goal and environmental obstacles on rapid feedback responses
Open accessAbstract
The motor system must consider a variety of environmental factors when executing voluntary motor actions, such as the shape of the goal or the possible presence of intervening obstacles. It remains unknown whether rapid feedback responses to mechanical perturbations also consider these factors. Our first experiment quantified how feedback corrections were altered by target shape, which was either a circular dot or a bar. Unperturbed movements to each target were qualitatively similar on average but with greater dispersion of end point positions when reaching to the bar. On random trials, multijoint torque perturbations deviated the hand left or right. When reaching to a circular target, perturbations elicited corrective movements that were directed straight to the location of the target. In contrast, corrective movements when reaching to a bar were redirected to other locations along the bar axis. Our second experiment quantified whether the presence of obstacles could interfere with feedback corrections. We found that hand trajectories after the perturbations were altered to avoid obstacles in the environment. Importantly, changes in muscle activity reflecting the different target shapes (bar vs. dot) or the presence of obstacles were observed in as little as 70 ms. Such changes in motor responses were qualitatively consistent with simulations based on optimal feedback control. Taken together, these results highlight that long-latency motor responses consider spatial properties of the goal and environment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination
Todorov, E., & Jordan, M. I. (2002) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn963 · Cited by 3,081
Optimality principles in sensorimotor control
Todorov, E. (2004) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1309 · Cited by 1,746
Evidence for the Flexible Sensorimotor Strategies Predicted by Optimal Feedback Control
Liu, D., & Todorov, E. (2007) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1110-06.2007 · Cited by 447
Rhythmic arm movement is not discrete
Schaal, S., Sternad, D., Osu, R., & Kawato, M. (2004) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1322 · Cited by 368
Bimanual coordination as task-dependent linear control policies
Diedrichsen, J., & Dowling, N. (2009) · Human Movement Science · doi:10.1016/j.humov.2008.10.003 · Cited by 40
Cited by
The computational and neural basis of voluntary motor control and planning
Scott, S. H. (2012) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.09.008 · Cited by 317
Self-citationParallel specification of competing sensorimotor control policies for alternative action options
Gallivan, J. P., Logan, L., Wolpert, D. M., & Flanagan, J. R. (2016) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.4214 · Cited by 124
Rotational dynamics in motor cortex are consistent with a feedback controller
Kalidindi, H. T., Cross, K. P., Lillicrap, T. P., Omrani, M., Falotico, E., Sabes, P. N., & Scott, S. H. (2021) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.67256 · Cited by 83
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Nashed, J. Y., Crevecoeur, F., & Scott, S. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Neurophysiology
- Publisher
- American Physiological Society
- Published
- 2012-08-15
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 999-1009
- ISSN
- 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-1598
- OpenAlex
- W2318919378
- Cited by
- 182
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 4.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Influence of the behavioral goal and environmental obstacles on rapid feedback responses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1152/jn.01089.2011
- The paper
- Nashed, J. Y., Crevecoeur, F., & Scott, S. H. (2012). Influence of the behavioral goal and environmental obstacles on rapid feedback responses. Journal of Neurophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.01089.2011
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.