Timing precision in circle drawing does not depend on spatial precision of the timing target

The authors manipulated the width of a timing target in continuous circle drawing to determine whether a more stringent spatial-timing criterion would produce an increase in participants' (N = 30) temporal variability. They also examined the effect of the computational method of determining cycle duration. There was no effect of spatial precision on temporal variability in circle drawing, and tapping and circle drawing were found to use the same criterion. Those findings lend strong support to the earlier view of R. B. Ivry, R. M. Spencer, H. N. Zelaznik, and J. Diedrichsen (2002), who argued that continuous tasks such as circle drawing are timed differently from discrete-like tasks such as tapping. Therefore, the results of the present study provide support for the event and emergent timing frameworks.     

Weber (Slope) Analyses of Timing Variability in Tapping and Drawing Tasks

Timing variability in continuous drawing tasks has not been found to be correlated with timing variability in repetitive finger tapping in recent studies (S. D. Robertson et al., 1999; H. N. Zelaznik, R. M. C. Spencer, & R. B. Ivry, 2002). Furthermore, the central component of timing variability, as measured by the slope of the timing variance versus the square of the timed interval, differed for tapping and drawing tasks. On the basis of those results, the authors posited that timing in tapping is explicit and as such uses a central representation of the interval to be timed, whereas timing in drawing tasks is implicit, that is, the temporal component is an emergent property of the trajectory produced. The authors examined that hypothesis in the present study by determining the linear relationship between timing variance and squared duration for tapping, circle-drawing, and line-drawing tasks. Participants (N = 501 performed 1 of 5 tasks: finger tapping, line drawing in the x dimension, line drawing in the y dimension, continuous circle drawing timed in the x dimension, or continuous circle drawing timed in the y dimension. The slopes differed significantly between finger tapping, line drawing, and circle drawing, suggesting separable sources of timing variability. The slopes of the 2 circle-drawing tasks did not differ from one another, nor did the slopes of the 2 line-drawing tasks differ significantly, suggesting a shared timing process within those tasks. Those results are evidence of a high degree of specificity in timing processes.     

Weber (slope) analyses of timing variability in tapping and drawing tasks

Timing variability in continuous drawing tasks has not been found to be correlated with timing variability in repetitive finger tapping in recent studies (S. D. Robertson et al., 1999; H. N. Zelaznik, R. M. C. Spencer, & R. B. Ivry, 2002). Furthermore, the central component of timing variability, as measured by the slope of the timing variance versus the square of the timed interval, differed for tapping and drawing tasks. On the basis of those results, the authors posited that timing in tapping is explicit and as such uses a central representation of the interval to be timed, whereas timing in drawing tasks is implicit, that is, the temporal component is an emergent property of the trajectory produced. The authors examined that hypothesis in the present study by determining the linear relationship between timing variance and squared duration for tapping, circle-drawing, and line-drawing tasks. Participants (N = 50) performed 1 of 5 tasks: finger tapping, line drawing in the x dimension, line drawing in the y dimension, continuous circle drawing timed in the x dimension, or continuous circle drawing timed in the y dimension. The slopes differed significantly between finger tapping, line drawing, and circle drawing, suggesting separable sources of timing variability. The slopes of the 2 circle-drawing tasks did not differ from one another, nor did the slopes of the 2 line-drawing tasks differ significantly, suggesting a shared timing process within those tasks. Those results are evidence of a high degree of specificity in timing processes.     

Dissociation of explicit and implicit timing in repetitive tapping and drawing movements

Four experiments explored the hypothesis that temporal processes may be represented and controlled explicitly or implicitly. Tasks hypothesized to require explicit timing were duration discrimination, tapping, and intermittent circle drawing. In contrast, it was hypothesized that timing control during continuous circle drawing does not rely on an explicit temporal representation; rather, temporal control is an emergent property of other control processes (i.e., timing is controlled implicitly). Temporal consistency on the tapping and intermittent drawing tasks was related, and performance on both of these tasks was correlated with temporal acuity on an auditory duration discrimination task. However, timing variability of these 3 tasks was not correlated with timing variability of continuous circle drawing. These results support the hypothesized distinction between explicit and implicit temporal representations.     

Temporal Precision in Tapping and Circle Drawing Movements at Preferred Rates is Not Correlated: Further Evidence Against Timing as a General-Purpose Ability

Recently, researchers have discovered that individuals who are consistent timers in a tapping task are not necessarily consistent timers when they perform a continuous drawing task. In other words, nonsignificant correlations were found among tapping and drawing movements for timing precision (S. D. Robertson et al., 1999). In the present experiment, the authors investigated whether or not consistency in timing for tapping and drawing was correlated when participants (N = 24) were allowed to move at their preferred rate of movement. There were no significant correlations between tapping and drawing in terms of timing precision. That result lends further support to the notion that timing behavior is specific to the nature of the task, and thus further weakens the idea that timing is a generalized ability that can be imposed on a variety of different types of tasks.     

Simultaneous Event-Based and Emergent Timing: Synchronization,Continuation, and Phase Correction

It has been claimed that rhythmic tapping and circle drawing represent fundamentally different timing processes (event-based and emergent, respectively) and also that circle drawing is difficult to synchronize with a metronome and exhibits little phase correction. In the present study, musically trained participants tapped with their left hands, drew circles with their right (dominant) hands, and also performed both tasks simultaneously. In Experiment 1, they synchronized with a metronome and then continued on their own, whereas in Experiment 2, they synchronized with a metronome containing phase perturbations. Circle drawing generally exhibited reliable synchronization, although with greater variability than tapping, and also showed a clear phase-correction response that evolved gradually during the cycle immediately following a perturbation. When carried out simultaneously in synchrony, with or without a metronome, the two tasks affected each other in some ways but retained their distinctive timing characteristics. This shows that event-based and emergent timing can coexist in a dual-task situation. Furthermore, the authors argue that the two timing modes usually coexist in each individual task, although one mode is often dominant.     

Timing variability in circle drawing and tapping: probing the relationship between event and emergent timing

R. Ivry, R. M. Spencer, H. N. Zelaznik, and J. Diedrichsen (2002) have proposed a distinction between timed movements in which a temporal representation is part of the task goal (event timing) and those in which timing properties are emergent. The issue addressed in the present experiment was how timing in conditions conducive to emergent timing becomes established. According to what the authors term the transformation hypothesis, timing initially requires an event-based representation when the temporal goal is defined externally (e.g., by a metronome), but over the first few movement cycles, control processes become established that allow timing to become emergent. Different groups of participants (N = 84) executed either 1 timed interval, 4 timed intervals, or 2 timed intervals separated by a pause. They produced the intervals by either circle drawing, a task associated with emergent timing, or tapping, a task associated with event timing. Analyses of movement variability suggested that similar timing processes were used in the 2 tasks only during the 1st interval. Those results are consistent with the transformation hypothesis and lead to the inference that the transition from event-based control to emergent timing can occur rapidly during continuous movements.     

Coordination dynamics and attentional costs of continuous and discontinuous bimanual circle drawing movements

It has been suggested that the temporal control of rhythmic unimanual movements is different between tasks requiring continuous (e.g., circle drawing) and discontinuous movements (e.g., finger tapping). Specifically, for continuous movements temporal regularities are an emergent property, whereas for tasks that involve discontinuities timing is an explicit part of the action goal. The present experiment further investigated the control of continuous and discontinuous movements by comparing the coordination dynamics and attentional demands of bimanual continuous circle drawing with bimanual intermittent circle drawing. The intermittent task required participants to insert a 400ms pause between each cycle while circling. Using dual-task methodology, 15 right-handed participants performed the two circle drawing tasks, while vocally responding to randomly presented auditory probes. The circle drawing tasks were performed in symmetrical and asymmetrical coordination modes and at movement frequencies of 1Hz and 1.7Hz. Intermittent circle drawing exhibited superior spatial and temporal accuracy and stability than continuous circle drawing supporting the hypothesis that the two tasks have different underlying control processes. In terms of attentional cost, probe RT was significantly slower during the intermittent circle drawing task than the continuous circle drawing task across both coordination modes and movement frequencies. Of interest was the finding that in the intermittent circling task reaction time (RT) to probes presented during the pause between cycles did not differ from the RT to probes occurring during the circling movement. The differences in attentional demands between the intermittent and continuous circle drawing tasks may reflect the operation of explicit event timing and implicit emergent timing processes, respectively.     

Continuous and Discontinuous Drawing: High Temporal Variability Exists Only in Discontinuous Circling in Young Children

The authors studied whether the drawing variability in young children is best explicable by (a) demands on the explicit timing system, (b) an underdeveloped ability to control limb dynamics, or (c) both. The explicit timing demands were lower in continuous drawing in comparison with the discontinuous task. The authors manipulated limb dynamics by changing the number of joints involved, with line drawing requiring fewer joints than circle drawing. Results showed that young children had high temporal variability in discontinuous circling but not in other conditions. The authors argue that both explicit timing and dynamic complexity of limb control may be determinants of temporal consistency and may thus play an important role in the development of drawing and writing skills in children.     

The distinction between tapping and circle drawing with and without tactile feedback: An examination of the sources of timing variance

An internal clock-like process has been implicated in the control of rhythmic movements performed for short (250–2,000 ms) time scales. However, in the past decade, it has been claimed that a clock-like central timing mechanism is not required for smooth cyclical movements. The distinguishing characteristic delineating clock-like (event) from non-clock-like (emergent) timing is thought to be the kinematic differences between tapping (discrete-like) and circle drawing (smooth). In the archetypal event-timed task (tapping), presence of perceptual events is confounded with the discrete kinematics of movement (table contact). Recently, it has been suggested that discrete perceptual events help participants synchronize with a metronome. However, whether discrete tactile events directly elicit event timing has yet to be determined. In the present study, we examined whether a tactile event inserted into the circle drawing timing task could elicit event timing in a self-paced (continuation) timing task. For a majority of participants, inserting an event into the circle drawing task elicited timing behaviour consistent with the idea that an internal timekeeper was employed (a correlation of circle drawing with tapping). Additionally, some participants exhibited characteristics of event timing in the typically emergently timed circle drawing task. We conclude that the use of event timing can be influenced by the insertion of perceptual events, and it also exhibits persistence over time and over tasks within certain individuals.     

Experience with Event Timing Does not Alter Emergent Timing: Further Evidence for Robustness of Event and Emergent Timing

Although, event and emergent timings are thought of as mutually exclusive, significant correlations between tapping and circle drawing (Baer, Thibodeau, Gralnick, Li, &; Penhune, 2013 Baer, L. H., Thibodeau, J. L. N., Gralnick, T. M., Li, K. Z. H., &; Penhune, V. B. (2013). The role of musical training in emergent and event-based timing. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7(191), 1–10. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00191.[Crossref], [PubMed] , [Google Scholar]; Studenka, Zelaznik, &; Balasubramaniam, 2012 Studenka, B. E., Zelaznik, H. N., &; Balasubramaniam, R. (2012). The distinction between tapping and circle drawing with and without tactile feedback: An examination of the sources of timing variance. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(6), 1086–1100. doi:10.1080/17470218.2011.640404.[Taylor &; Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]; Zelaznik &; Rosenbaum, 2010 Zelaznik, H. N., &; Rosenbaum, D. A. (2010). Timing processes are correlated when tasks share a salient event. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(6), 1565–1575. doi:10.1037/a0020380.[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) suggest that emergent timing may not be as robust as once thought. We aimed to test this hypothesis in both a younger (18–25) and older (55–100) population. Participants performed one block of circle drawing as a baseline, then six blocks of tapping, followed by circle drawing. We examined the use of event timing. Our hypothesis that acute experience with event timing would bias an individual to use event timing during an emergent task was not supported. We, instead, support the robustness of event and emergent timing as independent timing modes.     

Force and Timing Variability in Rhythmic Unimanual Tapping

In 3 experiments the interdependencies between timing and force production in unimanual paced and self-paced rhythmic tapping tasks were examined as participants (N = 6 in each experiment) tapped (a) to 1 of 3 target periods (333 ms, 500 ms, and 1,000 ms), while they simultaneously produced a constant peak force (PF) over a 50-s trial; (b) to produce 1 of 3 target forces (5, 10, and 15 N) at their preferred frequency, while keeping their rhythm as invariant as possible; and (c) to all combinations of target force and period. The results showed that (a) magnitudes of force and period were largely independent; (b) variability in timing increased proportionally with tapping period, and the variability in force increased with peak force; (c) force variability decreased at faster tapping rates; and (d) timing variability decreased with increasing force levels, (e) Analysis of tap-to-tap variability revealed adjustments over sequences of taps and an acceleration in the tapping rate in unpaced conditions. The interdependencies of force and time are discussed with respect to the challenges they provide for an oscillator-based account.     

Evidence of Common Timing Processes in the Control of Manual,Orofacial, and Speech Movements

Recent investigations of timing in motor control have been interpreted as support for the concept of brain modularity. According to this concept, the brain is organized into functional modules that contain mechanisms responsible for general processes. Keele and colleagues (Keele & Hawkins, 1982; Keele & Ivry, 1987; Keele, Ivry, & Pokorny, 1987; Keele, Pokorny, Corcos, & Ivry, 1985) demonstrated that the within-subject variability in cycle duration of repetitive movements is correlated across finger, forearm, and foot movements, providing evidence in support of a general timing module. The present study examines the notion of timing modularity of speech and nonspeech movements of the oral motor system as well as the manual motor system. Subjects produced repetitive movements with the finger, forearm, and jaw. In addition, a fourth task involved the repetition of a syllable. All tasks were to be produced with a 400-ms cycle duration; target duration was established with a pacing tone, which then was removed. For each task, the within-subject variability of the cycle duration was computed for the unpaced movements over 20 trials. Significant correlations were found between each pair of effectors and tasks. The present results provide evidence that common timing processes are involved not only in movements of the limbs, but also in speech and nonspeech movements of oral structures.     

Response Timing Accuracy as a Function of Movement Velocity and Distance

In two experiments, patterns of response error during a timing accuracy task were investigated. In Experiment 1. these patterns were examined across a full range of movement velocities, which provided a test of the hypothesis that as movement velocity increases, constant error (CE) shifts from a negative to a positive response bias, with the zero CE point occurring at approximately 50% of maximum movement velocity (Hancock & Newell, 1985). Additionally, by examining variable error (VE), timing error variability patterns over a full range of movement velocities were established. Subjects (N = 6) performed a series of forearm flexion movements requiring 19 different movement velocities. Results corroborated previous observations that variability of timing error primarily decreased as movement velocity increased from 6 to 42% of maximum velocity. Additionally, CE data across the velocity spectrum did not support the proposed timing error function. In Experiment 2, the effect(s) of responding at 3 movement distances with 6 movement velocities on response timing error were investigated. VE was significantly lower for the 3 high-velocity movements than for the 3 low-velocity movements. Additionally, when MT was mathematically factored out. VE was less at the long movement distance than at the short distance. As in Experiment 1, CE was unaffected by distance or velocity effects and the predicted CE timing error function was not evident.     

Circle drawing does not exhibit auditory-motor synchronization

Differences in timing control processes between tapping and circle drawing have been extensively documented during continuation timing. Differences between event and emergent control processes have also been documented for synchronization timing using emergent tasks that have minimal event-related information. However, it is not known whether the original circle-drawing task also behaves differently than tapping during synchronization. In this experiment, 10 participants performed a table-tapping and a continuous circle-drawing task to an auditory metronome. Synchronization performance was assessed via the value and variability of asynchronies. Synchronization was substantially more difficult in circle drawing than in tapping. Participants drawing timed circles exhibited drift in synchronization error and did not maintain a consistent phase relationship with the metronome. An analysis of temporal anchoring revealed that timing to the timing target was not more accurate than timing to other locations on the circle trajectory. The authors conclude that participants were not able to synchronize movement with metronome tones in the circle-drawing task despite other findings that cyclical tasks do exhibit auditory motor synchronization, because the circle-drawing task is unique and absent of event and cycle position information.     

Continuous and discontinuous drawing: high temporal variability exists only in discontinuous circling in young children

The authors studied whether the drawing variability in young children is best explicable by (a) demands on the explicit timing system, (b) an underdeveloped ability to control limb dynamics, or (c) both. The explicit timing demands were lower in continuous drawing in comparison with the discontinuous task. The authors manipulated limb dynamics by changing the number of joints involved, with line drawing requiring fewer joints than circle drawing. Results showed that young children had high temporal variability in discontinuous circling but not in other conditions. The authors argue that both explicit timing and dynamic complexity of limb control may be determinants of temporal consistency and may thus play an important role in the development of drawing and writing skills in children.     

Motor Performance of Stutterers and Nonstutterers on Timing and Force Control Tasks

Recently it has been suggested that speech and manual timing tasks share a common central process (Franz, Zelaznik, & Smith, 1992). Because stuttering is thought to be related to deficits in motoric processes such as timing, stutterers (n = 15) were compared with a set of age-, education-, and sex-matched nonstutterers on timing and isometric force-production tasks. In the timing tasks, subjects flexed and extended the right index finger at the metacarpophalangeal joint at cycle durations of 600, 500, 400, 300, and 200 ms. In the force-production tasks, subjects generated isometric forces to match target force levels displayed on a cathode-ray tube (CRT) screen. There were five levels of force, ranging from .11 to 7.85 newtons. Overall, there were no differences in timing and force-production performance between stutterers and nonstutterers. These results are similar to those obtained recently by Hulstijn, Summers, van Lieshout, and Peters (1992). We suggest that stuttering is not characterized by a general deficit in rhythmic timing. Instead, the motor deficit associated with stuttering should be viewed as speech specific.     

The effect of perceptual-motor continuity compatibility on the temporal control of continuous and discontinuous self-paced rhythmic movements

One of the questions yet to be fully understood is to what extent the properties of the sensory and the movement information interact to facilitate sensorimotor integration. In this study, we examined the relative contribution of the continuity compatibility between motor goals and their sensory outcomes in timing variability. The variability of inter-response intervals was measured in a synchronization-continuation paradigm. Participants performed two repetitive movement tasks whereby they drew circles either using continuous or discontinuous self-paced movements while receiving discrete or continuous auditory feedback. The results demonstrated that the effect of perceptual-motor continuity compatibility may be limited in self-paced auditory-motor synchronization as timing variability was not significantly influenced by the continuity of the feedback or the continuity compatibility between feedback and the movement produced. In addition, results suggested that the presence of salient perceptual events marking the completion of the time intervals elicited a common timing process in both continuous and discontinuous circle drawing, regardless of the continuity of the auditory feedback. These findings open a new line of investigation into the role of the discriminability and reliability of the event-based information in determining the nature of the timing mechanisms engaged in continuous and discontinuous self-paced rhythmic movements.     

Correlations for timing consistency among tapping and drawing tasks: evidence against a single timing process for motor control.

Three experiments were conducted to examine whether timing processes can be shared by continuous tapping and drawing tasks. In all 3 experiments, temporal precision in tapping was not related to temporal precision in continuous drawing. There were modest correlations among the tapping tasks, and there were significant correlations among the drawing tasks. In Experiment 3, the function relating timing variance to the square of the observed movement duration for tapping was different from that for drawing. The conclusions drawn were that timing is not an ability to be shared by a variety of tasks but instead that the temporal qualities of skilled movement are the result of the specific processes necessary to produce a trajectory. These results are consistent with the idea that timing is an emergent property of movement.     

Effects of an Auditory Model on the Learning of Relative and Absolute Timing

The effects of an auditory model on the learning of relative and absolute timing were examined. In 2 experiments, participants attempted to learn to produce a 1,000- or 1,600-ms sequence of 5 key presses with a specific relative-timing pattern. In each experiment, participants were, or were not, provided an auditory model that consisted of a series of tones that were temporally spaced according to the criterion relative-timing pattern. In Experiment 1, participants (n = 14) given the auditory template exhibited better relative- and absolute-timing performance than participants (n = 14) not given the auditory template. In Experiment 2, auditory and no-auditory template groups again were tested, but in that experiment each physical practice participant (n = 16) was paired during acquisition with an observer (n = 16). The observer was privy to all instructions as well as auditory and visual information that was provided the physical practice participant. The results replicated the results of Experiment 1: Relative-timing information was enhanced by the auditory template for both the physical and observation practice participants. Absolute timing was improved only when the auditory model was coupled with physical practice. Consistent with the proposal of D. M. Scully and K. M. Newell (1985), modeled timing information in physical and observational practice benefited the learning of the relative-timing features of the task, but physical practice was required to enhance absolute timing.