Literature DB >> 20237310

Spatial coincidence of intentional actions modulates an implicit visuomotor control.

Naotoshi Abekawa1, Hiroaki Gomi.   

Abstract

We investigated a visuomotor mechanism contributing to reach correction: the manual following response (MFR), which is a quick response to background visual motion that frequently occurs as a reafference when the body moves. Although several visual specificities of the MFR have been elucidated, the functional and computational mechanisms of its motor coordination remain unclear mainly because it involves complex relationships among gaze, reaching target, and visual stimuli. To directly explore how these factors interact in the MFR, we assessed the impact of spatial coincidences among gaze, arm reaching, and visual motion on the MFR. When gaze location was displaced from the reaching target with an identical visual motion kept on the retina, the amplitude of the MFR significantly decreased as displacement increased. A factorial manipulation of gaze, reaching-target, and visual motion locations showed that the response decrease is due to the spatial separation between gaze and reaching target but is not due to the spatial separation between visual motion and reaching target. Additionally, elimination of visual motion around the fovea attenuated the MFR. The effects of these spatial coincidences on the MFR are completely different from their effects on the perceptual mislocalization of targets caused by visual motion. Furthermore, we found clear differences between the modulation sensitivities of the MFR and the ocular following response to spatial mismatch between gaze and reaching locations. These results suggest that the MFR modulation observed in our experiment is not due to changes in visual interaction between target and visual motion or to modulation of motion sensitivity in early visual processing. Instead the motor command of the MFR appears to be modulated by the spatial relationship between gaze and reaching.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20237310     DOI: 10.1152/jn.91133.2008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  8 in total

1.  The relationship between the implicit visuomotor control and the motor planning accuracy.

Authors:  Kosuke Numasawa; Takeshi Miyamoto; Tomohiro Kizuka; Seiji Ono
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2021-05-11       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Is the manual following response an attempt to compensate for inferred self-motion?

Authors:  Yajie Zhang; Eli Brenner; Jacques Duysens; Sabine Verschueren; Jeroen B J Smeets
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Visually-updated hand state estimates modulate the proprioceptive reflex independently of motor task requirements.

Authors:  Sho Ito; Hiroaki Gomi
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 8.140

4.  Can ongoing movements be guided by allocentric visual information when the target is visible?

Authors:  Emily M Crowe; Martin Bossard; Eli Brenner
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  The response to background motion: Characteristics of a movement stabilization mechanism.

Authors:  Emily M Crowe; Jeroen B J Smeets; Eli Brenner
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2021-10-05       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  How moving backgrounds influence interception.

Authors:  Eli Brenner; Jeroen B J Smeets
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-13       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Action Sounds Modulate Arm Reaching Movements.

Authors:  Ana Tajadura-Jiménez; Torsten Marquardt; David Swapp; Norimichi Kitagawa; Nadia Bianchi-Berthouze
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-09-16

8.  Hand movements respond to any motion near the endpoint.

Authors:  Emily M Crowe; Jeroen B J Smeets; Eli Brenner
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-03-25       Impact factor: 2.157

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.