As shown in Fig. 2a, the mean of movement start in each condition was between 3.8 s and 4.5 s after the presentation of the warning light. This allowed to confirm that participants followed the instructions to not use the warning light as a starting cue but perform self-paced movements. The analysis on the MSt aimed to understand whether, for each bimanual condition, the two hands tended to start moving together. The repeated measures ANOVA revealed no main effect of HAND (F(1,16)=1.04, p=0.32), and CONDITION (F(1,16)=1.40, p=0.25) but an effect of DIFFICULTY (F(1,16)=16.95; p=.0008, 2=.020) indicating that subjects initiated to move the two hands simultaneously in every condition but the movement started overall later when both hands headed to easy targets.
…show more content…
Finally, we performed an ANOVA on the TRt that showed a significant effect DIFFICULTY (F(1,16)=16.95, p=.0008, 2=.013) and a trend for CONDITION (F(1,16)=3.53, p=.07, 2=.005) as the congruent movements were overall faster than incongruent conditions. No interaction effects was found (Figure2c).
Altogether, these results are in line with the previous finding on interlimb coordination (Kelso 1979b), even if in our case self-paced movements were
Finally, we performed an ANOVA on the TRt that showed a significant effect DIFFICULTY (F(1,16)=16.95, p=.0008, 2=.013) and a trend for CONDITION (F(1,16)=3.53, p=.07, 2=.005) as the congruent movements were overall faster than incongruent conditions. No interaction effects was found (Figure2c).
Altogether, these results are in line with the previous finding on interlimb coordination (Kelso 1979b), even if in our case self-paced movements were