4.2 Article

Body representation does not lag behind in updating for the pubertal growth spurt

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL CHILD PSYCHOLOGY
卷 175, 期 -, 页码 48-66

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2018.05.002

关键词

Body representation; Pubertal growth spurt; Motor competence; Tactile estimation; Reaching movements; Body image; Body schema; Clumsiness; Growth

资金

  1. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research [453-10-003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Both making perceptual judgments about your own body and successfully moving your body through the world depend on a mental representation of the body. However, there are indications that moving might be challenging when your body is changing. For instance, the pubertal growth spurt has been reported to be negatively correlated to motor competence. A possible explanation for this clumsiness would be that when the body is growing fast, updating the body representation may lag behind, resulting in a mismatch between internal body representation and actual body size. The current study investigated this hypothesis by testing participants ranging from aged 6 to 50 years on both a tactile body image task and a motor body schema task. Separate groups of participants, including those in the age range when pubertal growth spurt occurs, were asked to estimate the distance between two simultaneously applied tactile stimuli on the arm and to move their hand through apertures of different widths. Tactile distance estimations were equal between participants before, during, and after the age range where the pubertal growth spurt is expected. Similarly, Bayesian evaluation of informative hypotheses showed that participants in the age range of the growth spurt did not move through the apertures as if their representation of the hand was smaller than its physical size. These results suggest that body representations do not lag behind in updating for the pubertal growth spurt. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据