The present studies examined the nature of kinematic interlimb interfe
rence during bilateral elbow movements of 1:1, 2:1 and 3:1 frequency r
atios and the manner in which subjects cope with coordination bias. An
alysis of movement trajectories in the first experiment indicated prog
ressively greater angular velocity assimilation across 2:1 and 3:1 con
ditions. The desired temporal relationship was maintained by slowing o
r pausing the low-frequency movement al peak extension while the high-
frequency arm produced intervening cycles. An increase in amplitude wa
s also evident for concurrent, homologous cycles. Movement smoothness
was emphasized and additional practice was provided in a second experi
ment. This resulted ill dissociated peak angular velocity between limb
s and eliminated hesitations and amplitude effects, Bias was still evi
dent, however, as an intermittent. approach toward a 1:1 ratio within
each cycle. This systematic tendency was somewhat greater al the lower
of two absolute frequency combinations but was not influenced by the
role of each arm in producing the higher or lower frequency movement.
The findings from the first experiment suggest that subjects initially
accommodate interlimb kinematic assimilation, while producing the int
ended timing ratio, by Intermittently slowing or pausing the lower-fre
quency movement. This attenuates the need for bilaterally-disparate mo
vement parameters and provides additional time for organizing residual
kinematic differences, perhaps reducing ''transient coupling.'' Evide
nce from the second experiment indicates that subtle relative motion p
references are still evident following sufficient practice to perform
the movements smoothly. The within-cycle locations of the points of gr
eatest interlimb bias for the 2:1 rhythms were positively displaced fr
om those previously observed for 1:1 oscillations. The persistent coor
dination tendencies noted ill both experiments perhaps reflect an assi
milation/compensation cycle and constitute one potential source of the
systematic error that often emerges during the acquisition of complex
skills.