Literature DB >> 17618424

Specificity of practice results from differences in movement planning strategies.

Isabelle Mackrous1, Luc Proteau.   

Abstract

Withdrawing visual feedback after practice of a manual aiming task results in a severe decrease in aiming accuracy. This decrease in accuracy is such that participants are often less accurate than controls who are beginning practice of the task without visual feedback. These results have been interpreted as evidence that motor learning is specific to the sources of afferent information optimizing performance, because it could be processed at the exclusion of other sources of afferent information. The goal of the present study was to test this hypothesis. To reach our goal we evaluated whether online visual feedback prevented kinesthetic information to be used for: (1) eliminating movement anisotropy resulting from difference in limb inertia when aiming in different directions and (2) creating an internal model of limb mechanics. Participants practiced a manual aiming task with or without visual feedback and with knowledge of results. After this acquisition phase, participants performed two transfer tests. The first transfer test was performed without visual feedback and/or knowledge of results. The second transfer test was similar to the first one but participants initiated their movements from a different starting base. The results showed strong specificity effects in that withdrawing visual feedback resulted in large pointing bias and variability. However, the results of the two transfer tests showed that the processing of visual feedback did not prevent the processing of kinesthetic information used to eliminate movement anisotropy or to create an internal model of limb mechanics. Rather, specificity of practice effects resulted from participants using the same motor plan in transfer as they did in acquisition even though they had no longer access to visual feedback to modulate their movement online. These results indicate that during acquisition participants adopted different movement planning strategies depending on the source of afferent information available.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17618424     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-007-1031-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  22 in total

1.  Development of multiple movement representations with practice: specificity versus flexibility.

Authors:  M C Soucy; L Proteau
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 1.328

2.  Visual afferent information dominates other sources of afferent information during mixed practice of a video-aiming task.

Authors:  Luc Proteau
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-10-23       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Inferring online and offline processing of visual feedback in target-directed movements from kinematic data.

Authors:  Michael A Khan; Ian M Franks; Digby Elliott; Gavin P Lawrence; Romeo Chua; Pierre-Michel Bernier; Steve Hansen; Daniel J Weeks
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2006-07-12       Impact factor: 8.989

4.  Movement planning of video and of manual aiming movements.

Authors:  Patrick Bédard; Luc Proteau
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  2005

5.  Signal-dependent noise determines motor planning.

Authors:  C M Harris; D M Wolpert
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1998-08-20       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Optimality in human motor performance: ideal control of rapid aimed movements.

Authors:  D E Meyer; R A Abrams; S Kornblum; C E Wright; J E Smith
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Vectorial coding of movement: vision, proprioception, or both?

Authors:  Y Rossetti; M Desmurget; C Prablanc
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Accuracy of planar reaching movements. II. Systematic extent errors resulting from inertial anisotropy.

Authors:  J Gordon; M F Ghilardi; S E Cooper; C Ghez
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Learning a visuomotor transformation in a local area of work space produces directional biases in other areas.

Authors:  M F Ghilardi; J Gordon; C Ghez
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  The utilization of visual feedback information during rapid pointing movements.

Authors:  D Elliott; F Allard
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  1985-08
View more
  14 in total

1.  Developmental aspects of pluriarticular movement control.

Authors:  Isabelle Mackrous; Luc Proteau
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-05-30       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Effects of hand termination and accuracy constraint on eye-hand coordination during sequential two-segment movements.

Authors:  Miya K Rand; George E Stelmach
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-10-22       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Manual and oculomotor performance develop contemporaneously but independently during continuous tracking.

Authors:  Eric D Vidoni; Jason S McCarley; Jodi D Edwards; Lara A Boyd
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-05-13       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Factors influencing online control of video-aiming movements performed without vision of the cursor.

Authors:  Louis-Nicolas Veilleux; Luc Proteau
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2009-03-25

5.  Flexibility and individual differences in visuo-proprioceptive integration: evidence from the analysis of a morphokinetic control task.

Authors:  Philippe Boulinguez; Joëlle Rouhana
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-10-06       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Congruent visual and proprioceptive information results in a better encoding of initial hand position.

Authors:  Louis-Nicolas Veilleux; Luc Proteau
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-08-12       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  The specificity of practice hypothesis in goal-directed movements: visual dominance or proprioception neglect?

Authors:  Lucette Toussaint; Aurore Meugnot; Arnaud Badets; David Chesnet; Luc Proteau
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-02-12

8.  Automatic movement error detection and correction processes in reaching movements.

Authors:  Julien Brière; Luc Proteau
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Suboptimal online control of aiming movements in virtual contexts.

Authors:  Louis-Nicolas Veilleux; Luc Proteau
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-11-17       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 10.  Exercising your brain: a review of human brain plasticity and training-induced learning.

Authors:  C S Green; D Bavelier
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2008-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.