Next Article in Journal
Questions for The Psychology of the Artful Mind
Previous Article in Journal
The Perceptual and Aesthetic Aspects of the Music-Paintings Congruence
Previous Article in Special Issue
Grasping Discriminates between Object Sizes Less Not More Accurately than the Perceptual System
Open AccessArticle

Errors in Imagined and Executed Typing

Department of Psychology and Medical Sciences; Institute of Psychology, UMIT–Private University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, 6060 Hall in Tyrol, Austria
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vision 2019, 3(4), 66; https://doi.org/10.3390/vision3040066
Received: 8 April 2019 / Revised: 30 October 2019 / Accepted: 31 October 2019 / Published: 20 November 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Visual Control of Action)
In motor imagery (MI), internal models may predict the action effects. A mismatch between predicted and intended action effects may result in error detection. To compare error detection in MI and motor execution (ME), ten-finger typists and hunt-and-peck typists performed a copy-typing task. Visibility of the screen and visibility of the keyboard were manipulated. Participants reported what type of error occurred and by which sources they detected the error. With covered screen, fewer errors were reported, showing the importance of distal action effects for error detection. With covered screen, the number of reported higher-order planning errors did not significantly differ between MI and ME. However, the number of reported motor command errors was lower in MI than in ME. Hence, only errors that occur in advance to internal modeling are equally observed in MI and ME. MI may require more attention than ME, leaving fewer resources to monitor motor command errors in MI. In comparison to hunt-and-peck typists, ten-finger typists detected more higher-order planning errors by kinesthesis/touch and fewer motor command errors by vision of the keyboard. The use of sources for error detection did not significantly differ between MI and ME, indicating similar mechanisms.
Keywords: motor imagery; typing style; feedback; internal monitoring; forward models motor imagery; typing style; feedback; internal monitoring; forward models
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

MDPI and ACS Style

Dahm, S.F.; Rieger, M. Errors in Imagined and Executed Typing. Vision 2019, 3, 66.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
  • Supplementary File 1:

    PDF-Document (PDF, 402 KB)

  • Externally hosted supplementary file 1
    Doi: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/82TG3
    Description: raw data
Back to TopTop