Literature DB >> 20091300

Visuomotor adaptation and intermanual transfer under different viewing conditions.

Amaris K Balitsky Thompson1, Denise Y P Henriques.   

Abstract

Does the brain use a separate internal model for cursor mechanics during visuomotor adaptation? We compared the amount of adaptation and transfer to the opposite arm when subjects reached the targets under different viewing conditions of the arm during reaching. If the brain forms separate models, we predict a difference in the amount of adaptation and transfer for each viewing condition. If the brain forms one model, we predict equivalent amounts of adaptation and transfer between the two hands for each viewing condition. Separate groups of subjects performed a reaching task with either a rotated view of cursor motion representing their unseen hand or a rotated view of their actual hand. The two groups were further divided so that the magnitude of the rotation was either 45 degrees or 75 degrees counter-clockwise. After adapting to the rotation with one hand, subjects reached the same targets under the same viewing condition but with the opposite hand. Similar amounts of adaptation and intermanual transfer were found across the different magnitudes of rotation and across patterns of hand-order. Our results suggest that the brain may not be learning a distinct model for cursor mechanics, or if it is, it must be equivalent or overlapping with the arm model.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20091300     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-010-2155-0

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


  29 in total

1.  Differences in control of limb dynamics during dominant and nondominant arm reaching.

Authors:  R L Sainburg; D Kalakanis
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Evidence for a dynamic-dominance hypothesis of handedness.

Authors:  Robert L Sainburg
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2001-11-22       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Transfer of sensorimotor adaptation between different movement categories.

Authors:  Sylvie Abeele; Otmar Bock
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2002-11-16       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Is interlimb transfer of force-field adaptation a cognitive response to the sudden introduction of load?

Authors:  Nicole Malfait; David J Ostry
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2004-09-15       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Reach adaptation: what determines whether we learn an internal model of the tool or adapt the model of our arm?

Authors:  JoAnn Kluzik; Jörn Diedrichsen; Reza Shadmehr; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-07-02       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Mechanisms underlying interlimb transfer of visuomotor rotations.

Authors:  Jinsung Wang; Robert L Sainburg
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-02-26       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Variables affecting the intermanual transfer and decay of prism adaptation.

Authors:  C S Choe; R B Welch
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1974-06

8.  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

9.  Development of sensorially-guided reaching in infant monkeys.

Authors:  R Held; J A Bauer
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1974-05-17       Impact factor: 3.252

10.  Estimating the sources of motor errors for adaptation and generalization.

Authors:  Max Berniker; Konrad Kording
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2008-11-16       Impact factor: 24.884

View more
  20 in total

1.  Cerebellum as a forward but not inverse model in visuomotor adaptation task: a tDCS-based and modeling study.

Authors:  Fatemeh Yavari; Shirin Mahdavi; Farzad Towhidkhah; Mohammad-Ali Ahmadi-Pajouh; Hamed Ekhtiari; Mohammad Darainy
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-12-26       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  The effects of aging on the asymmetry of inter-limb transfer in a visuomotor task.

Authors:  Zhujun Pan; Arend W A Van Gemmert
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-07-06       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Trial-by-trial analysis of intermanual transfer during visuomotor adaptation.

Authors:  Jordan A Taylor; Greg J Wojaczynski; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-09-14       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Cerebellar-M1 Connectivity Changes Associated with Motor Learning Are Somatotopic Specific.

Authors:  Danny A Spampinato; Hannah J Block; Pablo A Celnik
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2017-01-30       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Challenging balance during sensorimotor adaptation increases generalization.

Authors:  Amanda Bakkum; J Maxwell Donelan; Daniel S Marigold
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-03-04       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Visuomotor adaptation and generalization with repeated and varied training.

Authors:  Jason L Neva; Denise Y P Henriques
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Stimulating the cerebellum affects visuomotor adaptation but not intermanual transfer of learning.

Authors:  Hannah Block; Pablo Celnik
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.847

8.  Lateralized motor control processes determine asymmetry of interlimb transfer.

Authors:  Robert L Sainburg; Sydney Y Schaefer; Vivek Yadav
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 3.590

9.  Intermanual transfer and proprioceptive recalibration following training with translated visual feedback of the hand.

Authors:  Ahmed A Mostafa; Danielle Salomonczyk; Erin K Cressman; Denise Y P Henriques
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Concurrent adaptation to opposing visuomotor rotations by varying hand and body postures.

Authors:  Maria N Ayala; Bernard Marius 't Hart; Denise Y P Henriques
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.