This section reevaluates varieties of spatial form producible by the body. This includes a review of taxonomies of kinespheric forms presented in choreutics and dance, characteristics of perceiving forms as identified in spatial cognition research, and the structure of anatomy which constrains the physical production of kinespheric forms. A need for distinctions between classes of body movements is identified within the schema theory for motor learning and it is argued here that choreutic theory can contribute to solving this problem. Topological categories of kinespheric forms are observed to deflect slightly from one execution to the next and so can be conceived as the “co-ordinational net of the motor field . . . oscillating like a cobweb in the wind” (Bernstein, 1984, p. 109). This is virtually identical to the choreutic conception of a topologic form as deflecting between variously-shaped polyhedral cognitive maps of the kinesphere. An experiment is presented which verifies that kinesthetic spatial information is subjectively organised into categories during learning and memory processes. Results indicated that kinespheric categories were best predicted by their form (movements with the same shape were clustered together in free recall), while prototypicality was best predicted by the orientation (dimensionally oriented paths were recalled first in a cluster). Continuing research determining psychologically valid kinesthetic categories is suggested.

IVB.11 The Need for Kinespheric Categories in Psychology.

In psychological theory there is a need to develop criteria for distinguishing between different categories of body movement information. This is especially true in regards to the schema theory for motor learning. Probing the structure of kinespheric (ie. kinesthetic-spatial) categories can contribute to this lack of knowledge.

A schema theory for motor learning was developed by Schmidt (1975; 1976; 1982) and is described as “currently [the] dominant psychological theory of motor learning” (Jordan and Rosenbaum, 1989, p. 753). Schema theory posits that movements are not stored in memory as individual items, but as members of categories based on the movements’ core attributes. A range of movements within the same “general type” of movement are perceived or produced by allowing variations in the initial sensory conditions, the selected parameters for execution (eg. how forceful, how quick), the sensory feedback resulting from the execution, and the environmental effects of the movement. Schema theory explains that novel movements are perceived or produced by comparing them to, or deriving them from the “basic pattern”. However, the foundation of the schema, the “general type” of movement, that forms the basis for distinguishing between different categories of schema families, remains undefined.

A major prediction of the schema theory is known as the “variability of practice hypothesis” which predicts that experiences of a wide variety of movements within the same “general class” will “transfer” to (ie. be equivalent to having practiced) a new movement within that same general class, but which itself has never before been experienced (Schmidt, 1975, p. 257). Intuitively it seems likely that a wide variety of experiences will allow a more ready perception and response to novel experiences but experimental tests of the variability of practice hypothesis have not demonstrated consistent results (For reviews see; Lee et al., 1985; Shapiro and Schmidt, 1982, pp. 118-129; and Appendix XIV).

The major problem in evaluating the variability of practice hypothesis has been identified as the lack of criteria for determining when movements belong to the same schema family or not (Newell, 1991, p. 221; Sheridan, 1984, p. 79; Van Rossum, 1980). It is typically left up to the personal judgment of the Experimenter as to whether movements are considered to be variations of the same schema or not. Schmidt (1975) referred to a schema family as containing movements with the same “basic pattern” and which therefore belong to the same “general type” (p. 235) or to the “same class” (p. 257). However, the criteria for determining this membership is neglected. The closest definition given is that movements of the same general type are those which attempt to satisfy the same goal (p. 235). Later, Shapiro and Schmidt (1982, p. 136) speculated that a general class may be defined by the pattern of relative timing between the elements of the sequence (ie. “phasing), however this severely limits the range of each class and would appear to negate the benefits of a schema representation. Categories of movement as outlined in dance and choreutic studies may contribute to solving this problem of distinguishing between general classes of bodily movement.

IVB.12 Paths, Poses, and Virtual Forms.

This research is focusing on distinguishing among kinesthetic spatial, that is, “kinespheric” categories (see IIB.38). A preliminary distinction among categories of kinespheric form can be made between paths, poses, and “virtual forms”. In an analysis of spatial forms in dance Preston-Dunlop (1980, pp. 87-93, 109-135; 1981, pp. 54-60; 1984, p. x) distinguishes four different manners by which spatial forms can be created by the body. Preston-Dunlop calls these the “realisation” (1984, p. x), of the four “manners of materialisation” (1981, p. 54) by which the forms are “‘embodied’ by the dancer” (1980, p. 109; also 1979, p. 142). “Spatial progression” refers to embodying a form within the pathway of a body-part or the body’s centre of gravity as it moves through space. “Body design” refers to embodying a form within the sculptural positions and mass of the body itself. “Spatial tension” refers to embodying a form by causing it to be perceived as connections between body-parts in separate locations. “Spatial projection” refers to embodying a form by causing it to be perceived as flying outwards beyond the body into the general expanse of space.

In Preston-Dunlop’s (1981) approach spatial forms are always considered in relation to the process through which they are made visible to an observer. For example a body-design is regarded as being present only if “the dynamics of the performance draws the audience’s eye to that design” (p. 55). Thus, a kinespheric form is not considered to be an objective, actual entity, but is regarded as “virtual” in that it is “dependent on dynamics, for its perceptibility” (p. 57) and is considered to be occurring only when “made visible by the performance given to it by the dancer and/or by the relationships and dynamics structured by the choreographer” (p. 30).

In a slightly different approach, this study will focus on defining objective criteria for categorising kinespheric form. Spatial progressions and body designs have often been studied in motor control and spatial cognition research since they lend themselves to objective analysis. For example, Smyth and Colleagues (1988) called these “patterns” and “positions” respectively. They are referred to here as “paths” and “poses”.

However, the observation of kinespheric form “embodied” by spatial tension and spatial projection is based almost entirely on subjective perception. In studies of perception in art, Arnheim (1974, pp. 16-18) referred to these as “psychological forces” to distinguish them from “physical forces”. They can be referred to collectively as “virtual” forms, following Preston-Dunlop (1981, pp. 30, 48-49, 55, 57) and the philosopher Susanne Langer (1953, pp. 72, 186-187). Particular arrangements of spatial stimuli can tend to include perceptions of spatial “tensions” (perceived lines of tension connecting between body parts across empty space) or “projections (perceived lines projecting out from beyond the body). These are perceived just as if they were “virtually” real but they do not have any objective physical reality.* Virtual forms have not been a focus of this research but a brief review is included in Appendix XV.
__________
* This is not intended to deny the possibility that certain people can perceive the spatial arrangement of other real forces emanating from or surrounding the body (eg. electromagnetism, body auras).
__________


IVB.13 Linear, Planar, and Plastic Forms.

Another preliminary distinction is between linear, planar and plastic forms. The terms one-dimensional, two-dimensional, and three-dimensional are often used to refer to both a form and an orientation. For example, in their analysis of body movements “three-dimensional” forms are typically considered to be different than “linear” forms (Moore and Yamamoto, 1988, p. 196). However, sometimes a linear form is also three-dimensional in the case of a diagonal oriented line. The dual definition of “three-dimensional” as a form or as an orientation often leads to students’ confusions (personal observation) and so it is desirable to distinguish between these terms.

“One-dimensional”, “two-dimensional” and “three-dimensional” will be used here to refer to the orientation relative to the dimensions of a Cartesian coordinate system. Orientations are considered in an earlier section (see IVA). The terms “linear”, “planar” and “plastic” will be used here to refer to the shape of the form. A linear form spans across a distance, a planar form describes an area, and a plastic form encompasses a volume of space. The term “plastic” is used in this volumetric sense by Bernstein (1984, p. 84) and in many choreutic texts* (Dell, 1970, p. 55; Laban, 1926, p. 17; 1966, pp. 18, 20-21; Ullmann, 1966, p. 208) and is defined as “relating to moulding or modeling: the plastic arts” (Collins, 1986). This is similar to the “constant blending of the muscle group functions in many joints” (Dell, 1970, p. 55) or how “the bodily coordination required is more complicated, often involving [combinations of] flexion/extension, abduction/adduction, and rotation” (Moore and Yamamoto, 1988, p. 194) which are characteristic descriptions of plastic kinespheric forms.
__________
* Rarely “plastic” is used to refer to the orientation rather than the form (Laban, 1966, p. 77) which further necessitates the distinction between form and orientation.
__________