Sensorimotor Neuroscience Laboratory, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, L8S 2K1, Canada.
Exp Brain Res. 2009 Nov;199(2):157-66. doi: 10.1007/s00221-009-1991-2. Epub 2009 Aug 27.
To account for sensorimotor synchronization, the information processing and the dynamical systems perspectives have developed different classes of models. While the former has focused on cycle-to-cycle correction of the timing errors, the latter deals with a continuous, state-dependent within-cycle coupling between the oscillating limb and the metronome. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the extent to which the two modeling frameworks partially capture the same behavior or, instead, account for different aspects of synchronization. A comparative two-level analysis (time intervals and movement trajectories) of synchronized tapping and synchronized oscillation data revealed distinct patterns of results with regard to (1) the relationship between the (a)symmetry of movement cycles and the achievement of timing goals, and (2) the sequential or within-cycle organization of synchronization processes. Our results support the idea that movement trajectories contribute to the achievement of synchronized movement timing in two different ways as a function of the (dis)continuous nature of movement. We suggest that the two modeling frameworks indeed account for different synchronization processes involved in the process of keeping time with the beat.
为了说明运动同步,信息处理和动力系统视角已经开发了不同类别的模型。前者侧重于循环到循环的定时误差校正,而后者则处理振荡肢体和节拍器之间在周期内的连续的、状态依赖的内周期耦合。本研究的目的是调查这两种建模框架在多大程度上部分地捕捉相同的行为,或者相反,说明同步的不同方面。对同步敲击和同步振荡数据的两级分析(时间间隔和运动轨迹)显示了关于以下方面的不同结果模式:(1)运动周期的(非)对称性与计时目标的实现之间的关系,以及(2)同步过程的顺序或周期内组织。我们的结果支持这样的观点,即运动轨迹通过运动的(不)连续性以两种不同的方式有助于实现同步运动的定时。我们建议,这两种建模框架确实可以说明在与节拍保持时间的过程中涉及的不同的同步过程。