Literature DB >> 11826139

Kinematics and dynamics are not represented independently in motor working memory: evidence from an interference study.

Christine Tong1, Daniel M Wolpert, J Randall Flanagan.   

Abstract

Our capacity to learn multiple dynamic and visuomotor tasks is limited by the time between the presentations of the tasks. When subjects are required to adapt to equal and opposite position-dependent visuomotor rotations (Krakauer et al., 1999) or velocity-dependent force fields (Brashers-Krug et al., 1996) in quick succession, interference occurs that prevents the first task from being consolidated in memory. In contrast, such interference is not observed between learning a position-dependent visuomotor rotation and an acceleration-dependent force field. On the basis of this finding, it has been argued that internal models of kinematic and dynamic sensorimotor transformations are learned independently (Krakauer et al., 1999). However, these findings are also consistent with the perturbations interfering only if they depend on the same kinematic variable. We evaluated this hypothesis using kinematic and dynamic transformations matched in terms of the kinematic variable on which they depend. Subjects adapted to a position-dependent visuomotor rotation followed 5 min later by a position-dependent rotary force field either with or without visual feedback of arm position. The force field tended to rotate the hand in the direction opposite to the visuomotor rotation. To assess learning, all subjects were retested 24 hr later on the visuomotor rotation, and their performance was compared with a control group exposed only to the visuomotor rotation on both days. Adapting to the position-dependent force field, both with and without visual feedback, impaired learning of the visuomotor rotation. Thus, interference between our kinematic and dynamic transformations was observed, suggesting that the key determinant of interference is the kinematic variable on which the transformation depends.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11826139      PMCID: PMC6758505     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  17 in total

Review 1.  Internal models for motor control and trajectory planning.

Authors:  M Kawato
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 6.627

2.  Conditions for interference versus facilitation during sequential sensorimotor adaptation.

Authors:  O Bock; S Schneider; J Bloomberg
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Visuomotor rotations of varying size and direction compete for a single internal model in motor working memory.

Authors:  Virginia Wigmore; Christine Tong; J Randall Flanagan
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 4.  Sensory-motor coordination during grasping and manipulative actions.

Authors:  R S Johansson; K J Cole
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 6.627

5.  Temporal and amplitude generalization in motor learning.

Authors:  S J Goodbody; D M Wolpert
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Functional stages in the formation of human long-term motor memory.

Authors:  R Shadmehr; T Brashers-Krug
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1997-01-01       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  The role of internal models in motion planning and control: evidence from grip force adjustments during movements of hand-held loads.

Authors:  J R Flanagan; A M Wing
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1997-02-15       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  The motor system does not learn the dynamics of the arm by rote memorization of past experience.

Authors:  M A Conditt; F Gandolfo; F A Mussa-Ivaldi
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  An internal model for sensorimotor integration.

Authors:  D M Wolpert; Z Ghahramani; M I Jordan
Journal:  Science       Date:  1995-09-29       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task.

Authors:  R Shadmehr; F A Mussa-Ivaldi
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 6.167

View more
  81 in total

1.  Adaptation to rotated visual feedback: a re-examination of motor interference.

Authors:  R Christopher Miall; Ned Jenkinson; Kunal Kulkarni
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-11-08       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Patterns of interference in sequence learning and prism adaptation inconsistent with the consolidation hypothesis.

Authors:  Kelly M Goedert; Daniel B Willingham
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2002 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.460

Review 3.  Context-dependent adaptation of visually-guided arm movements and vestibular eye movements: role of the cerebellum.

Authors:  Richard F Lewis
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 3.847

4.  Limitations in interlimb transfer of visuomotor rotations.

Authors:  Jinsung Wang; Robert L Sainburg
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-12-19       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Failure to consolidate the consolidation theory of learning for sensorimotor adaptation tasks.

Authors:  Graham Caithness; Rieko Osu; Paul Bays; Henry Chase; Jessica Klassen; Mitsuo Kawato; Daniel M Wolpert; J Randall Flanagan
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2004-10-06       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Evaluation of negative viscosity as upper extremity training for stroke survivors.

Authors:  Felix C Huang; James L Patton
Journal:  IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot       Date:  2011

7.  Augmented dynamics and motor exploration as training for stroke.

Authors:  Felix C Huang; James L Patton
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2012-04-03       Impact factor: 4.538

8.  Manual skill generalization enhanced by negative viscosity.

Authors:  Felix C Huang; James L Patton; Ferdinando A Mussa-Ivaldi
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  The nervous system uses nonspecific motor learning in response to random perturbations of varying nature.

Authors:  Kunlin Wei; Daniel Wert; Konrad Körding
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-09-22       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Seeing the Errors You Feel Enhances Locomotor Performance but Not Learning.

Authors:  Ryan T Roemmich; Andrew W Long; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 10.834

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.