↓ Skip to main content

Articulated coordination of the right arm underlies control of bow parameters and quick bow reversals in skilled cello bowing

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Articulated coordination of the right arm underlies control of bow parameters and quick bow reversals in skilled cello bowing
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00885
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julius Verrel, Marjorie Woollacott, Ulman Lindenberger

Abstract

Stringed instrument bowing is a complex coordinative motor skill acquired though years of intense practice. We apply a novel "freezing" analysis to investigate how movement at different joints contributes to bow transport (movement amplitude), stabilization of bow parameters (angle, velocity) during bow movements, and quick reversals of bow direction (acceleration amplitude). Participants were ten advanced or professional cellists (19-32 years, at least 10 years of practice) and ten age-matched novice players. Arm and bow movements were recorded using 3D motion capture. To assess how performance depends on articulated use of the right arm, actual data were compared to surrogate data, generated by artificially removing movement at ("freezing") individual joints in measured arm movements. This analysis showed that both elbow and shoulder significantly contribute to bow transport in experts, while only the shoulder contributed to bow transport in novices. Moreover, experts showed more strongly increased variability of bow parameters and reduced acceleration amplitudes at bow reversals for surrogate compared to actual movement data. This indicates that movement across joints was organized to reduce bow variability and achieve quick bow reversals. Corresponding effects were less pronounced or absent in the novices, in particular for the wrist and elbow. Our results demonstrate the importance of articulated use of the right arm and clarify the contribution of different joints in experts' bowing performance. Moreover, they support theories of motor control and learning that propose exploitation of biomechanical degrees of freedom, in particular of distal joints, as a critical component in skilled motor performance.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Spain 1 3%
Unknown 31 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 18%
Researcher 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 5 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 12%
Sports and Recreations 4 12%
Arts and Humanities 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Other 9 27%
Unknown 3 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 August 2014.
All research outputs
#13,716,141
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,845
of 29,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,481
of 305,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#116
of 182 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,672 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 305,286 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 182 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.