Literature DB >> 18936925

Effects of roll visual motion on online control of arm movement: reaching within a dynamic virtual environment.

Assaf Y Dvorkin1, Robert V Kenyon, Emily A Keshner.   

Abstract

Reaching toward a visual target involves the transformation of visual information into appropriate motor commands. Complex movements often occur either while we are moving or when objects in the world move around us, thus changing the spatial relationship between our hand and the space in which we plan to reach. This study investigated whether rotation of a wide field-of-view immersive scene produced by a virtual environment affected online visuomotor control during a double-step reaching task. A total of 20 seated healthy subjects reached for a visual target that remained stationary in space or unpredictably shifted to a second position (either to the right or left of its initial position) with different inter-stimulus intervals. Eleven subjects completed two experiments which were similar except for the duration of the target's appearance. The final target was either visible throughout the entire trial or only for a period of 200 ms. Movements were performed under two visual field conditions: the virtual scene was matched to the subject's head motion or rolled about the line of sight counterclockwise at 130 degrees/s. Nine additional subjects completed a third experiment in which the direction of the rolling scene was manipulated (i.e., clockwise and counterclockwise). Our results showed that while all subjects were able to modify their hand trajectory in response to the target shift with both visual scenes, some of the double-step movements contained a pause prior to modifying trajectory direction. Furthermore, our findings indicated that both the timing and kinematic adjustments of the reach were affected by roll motion of the scene. Both planning and execution of the reach were affected by roll motion. Changes in proportion of trajectory types, and significantly longer pauses that occurred during the reach in the presence of roll motion suggest that background roll motion mainly interfered with the ability to update the visuomotor response to the target displacement. Furthermore, the reaching movement was affected differentially by the direction of roll motion. Subjects demonstrated a stronger effect of visual motion on movements taking place in the direction of visual roll (e.g., leftward movements during counterclockwise roll). Further investigation of the hand path revealed significant changes during roll motion for both the area and shape of the 95% tolerance ellipses that were constructed from the hand position following the main movement termination. These changes corresponded with a hand drift that would suggest that subjects were relying more on proprioceptive information to estimate the arm position in space during roll motion of the visual field. We conclude that both the spatial and temporal kinematics of the reach movement were affected by the motion of the visual field, suggesting interference with the ability to simultaneously process two consecutive stimuli.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18936925      PMCID: PMC2754393          DOI: 10.1007/s00221-008-1598-z

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


  49 in total

1.  Reaching during virtual rotation: context specific compensations for expected coriolis forces.

Authors:  J V Cohn; P DiZio; J R Lackner
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 2.  Why and how are posture and movement coordinated?

Authors:  Jean Massion; Alexei Alexandrov; Alexander Frolov
Journal:  Prog Brain Res       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.453

3.  On-line versus off-line vestibular-evoked control of goal-directed arm movements.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Bresciani; Jean Blouin; Fabrice Sarlegna; Christophe Bourdin; Jean-Louis Vercher; Gabriel M Gauthier
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2002-08-27       Impact factor: 1.837

4.  Position coding in a video-controlled pointing task with a rotated visual display: evidence for individual differences in visuo-proprioceptive interaction.

Authors:  Y Coello; I Milleville-Pennel; J P Orliaguet
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2004-10-21       Impact factor: 3.046

5.  Reaching within video-capture virtual reality: using virtual reality as a motor control paradigm.

Authors:  Assaf Y Dvorkin; Meir Shahar; Patrice L Tamar Weiss
Journal:  Cyberpsychol Behav       Date:  2006-04

6.  Visually guided reaching depends on motion area MT+.

Authors:  David Whitney; Amanda Ellison; Nichola J Rice; Derek Arnold; Melvyn Goodale; Vincent Walsh; David Milner
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2007-02-08       Impact factor: 5.357

7.  Spatio-temporal and kinematic analysis of pointing movements performed by cerebellar patients with limb ataxia.

Authors:  B Bonnefoi-Kyriacou; E Legallet; R G Lee; E Trouche
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Quantization of continuous arm movements in humans with brain injury.

Authors:  H I Krebs; M L Aisen; B T Volpe; N Hogan
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1999-04-13       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Temporal stability of the action-perception cycle for postural control in a moving visual environment.

Authors:  T M Dijkstra; G Schöner; C C Gielen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Reaching in reality and virtual reality: a comparison of movement kinematics in healthy subjects and in adults with hemiparesis.

Authors:  Antonin Viau; Anatol G Feldman; Bradford J McFadyen; Mindy F Levin
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2004-12-14       Impact factor: 4.262

View more
  5 in total

1.  Time series analysis of postural responses to combined visual pitch and support surface tilt.

Authors:  Jill C Slaboda; Richard Lauer; Emily A Keshner
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2011-01-14       Impact factor: 3.046

2.  Mapping the neglected space: gradients of detection revealed by virtual reality.

Authors:  Assaf Y Dvorkin; Ross A Bogey; Richard L Harvey; James L Patton
Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair       Date:  2011-07-11       Impact factor: 3.919

Review 3.  Using virtual reality to augment perception, enhance sensorimotor adaptation, and change our minds.

Authors:  W Geoffrey Wright
Journal:  Front Syst Neurosci       Date:  2014-04-08

4.  Planning and adjustments for the control of reach extent in a virtual environment.

Authors:  Jill Campbell Stewart; James Gordon; Carolee J Winstein
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2013-03-02       Impact factor: 4.262

5.  A "virtually minimal" visuo-haptic training of attention in severe traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Assaf Y Dvorkin; Milan Ramaiya; Eric B Larson; Felise S Zollman; Nancy Hsu; Sonia Pacini; Amit Shah; James L Patton
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2013-08-09       Impact factor: 4.262

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.