Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Influence of voluntary intent on the human long-latency stretch reflex

Abstract

In man, sudden stretch of an actively contracting muscle evokes a classical monosynaptic spinal reflex followed by an automatic ‘long-latency’ response, both evident as bursts of activity in the electromyogram (EMG)1. This long-latency response, extensively investigated in the human long thumb flexor, but present in many other muscles2, occurs too early to be voluntary and much indirect evidence suggests it represents the operation of a ‘long-loop’, perhaps transcortical, stretch reflex mechanism3,4. Some investigators have found that the long-latency responses may be modified substantially by the subject's intent, possibly by pre-setting of excitability levels within the central nervous system thereby influencing the ‘long-loop’ mechanism5–9. However, others have observed little effect of voluntary set on the automatic long-latency stretch response10,11. It is notable that these studies, which have yielded conflicting results, have involved different muscles in a variety of experimental conditions. In some studies a warning signal preceded muscular stretch, while in others control trials were interspersed with stretches. To resolve the dilemma we have examined the influence of these variables, and found that the automatic long-latency response can be modified most strongly in conditions when the voluntary reaction time is shortest, for example, when the timing of the stimulus can be predicted accurately. We suggest that modification of a long-loop stretch response is not due to some central pre-setting process, but merely represents interaction between a reflex of long latency and a subsequent very rapid voluntary event, occurring early because of predictability of the stimulus.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Marsden, C. D., Merton, P. A. & Morton, H. B. Nature 238, 140–143 (1972); J. Physiol., Lond. 257, 1–44 (1976).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Marsden, C. D., Merton, P. A. & Morton, H. B. J. Physiol., Lond. 259, 531–560 (1976).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Marsden, C. D., Merton, P. A. & Morton, H. B. Lancet i, 759–761 (1973).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Marsden, C. D., Merton, P. A., Morton, H. B. & Adam, J. Brain 100, 185–200, 503–526 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hammond, P. H. J. Physiol., Lond. 132, 17–18P (1956).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lee, R. G. & Tatton, W. G. Can. J. neurol. Sci. 2, 285–293 (1975).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Evarts, E. V. & Granit, R. Prog. Brain Res. 44, 1–14 (1976).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Iles, J. F. Expl Brain Res. 30, 451–470 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Colebatch, J. G., Gandevia, S. C., McCloskey, D.I. & Porter, E. K. J. Physiol., Lond. 292, 527–534 (1979).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Marsden, C. D., Merton, P. A., Morton, H. B., Adam, J. & Hallet, M. Prog. clin. Neurophysiol. 4, 167–177 (1978).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Evarts, E. V. & Vaughn, W.J. Prog. clin. Neurophysiol. 4, 178–192 (1978).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Klemmer, E. T. J. exp. Psychol. 51, 179–184 (1956); 54, 195–200 (1957).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rothwell, J., Traub, M. & Marsden, C. Influence of voluntary intent on the human long-latency stretch reflex. Nature 286, 496–498 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1038/286496a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/286496a0

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing