[FROM: Dennis Delprato (921218)]
Two more impediments to mainstream experimental
psychologists' giving serious consideration to PCT:
1. Widespread thinking of two basic choices: (a) central
control and (b) closed-loop (or input or sensory or peripheral
feedback) control, plus, of course, the eclectic combination
of the two. According to this thinking, the closed-loop theory
is that sensory "information" from one movement serves to
instigate the next movement. There may even be a comparator
involved (e.g., Bernstein). Now, none of this has anything to
do with PCT--the very idea of central vs. peripheral control
is by the boards. But, I do not believe PCT theorists have
done a good job of addressing how their approach departs from
this sort of very elementary, widely entrenched thinking.
2. One of the most frequently-heard reasons for ignoring
feedback control (in framework of above) is that feedback is
too slow relative to the speed of movements that can be made.
Can anyone cite me a publication in which this issue is
directly addressed from the standpoint of PCT? I am
looking for a coherent presentation that is data-based.