Literature DB >> 21159971

Seeing is believing: effects of visual contextual cues on learning and transfer of locomotor adaptation.

Gelsy Torres-Oviedo1, Amy J Bastian.   

Abstract

Devices such as robots or treadmills are often used to drive motor learning because they can create novel physical environments. However, the learning (i.e., adaptation) acquired on these devices only partially generalizes to natural movements. What determines the specificity of motor learning, and can this be reliably made more general? Here we investigated the effect of visual cues on the specificity of split-belt walking adaptation. We systematically removed vision to eliminate the visual-proprioceptive mismatch that is a salient cue specific to treadmills: vision indicates that we are not moving while leg proprioception indicates that we are. We evaluated the adaptation of temporal and spatial features of gait (i.e., timing and location of foot landing), their transfer to walking over ground, and washout of adaptation when subjects returned to the treadmill. Removing vision during both training (i.e., on the treadmill) and testing (i.e., over ground) strongly improved the transfer of treadmill adaptation to natural walking. Removing vision only during training increased transfer of temporal adaptation, whereas removing vision only during testing increased the transfer of spatial adaptation. This dissociation reveals differences in adaptive mechanisms for temporal and spatial features of walking. Finally training without vision increased the amount that was learned and was linked to the variability in the behavior during adaptation. In conclusion, contextual cues can be manipulated to modulate the magnitude, transfer, and washout of device-induced learning in humans. These results bring us closer to our ultimate goal of developing rehabilitation strategies that improve movements beyond the clinical setting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21159971      PMCID: PMC3025449          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4205-10.2010

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


  39 in total

1.  Independent learning of internal models for kinematic and dynamic control of reaching.

Authors:  J W Krakauer; M F Ghilardi; C Ghez
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 24.884

2.  Multiple paired forward and inverse models for motor control.

Authors:  D M Wolpert; M Kawato
Journal:  Neural Netw       Date:  1998-10

3.  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

4.  Cerebellar contributions to locomotor adaptations during splitbelt treadmill walking.

Authors:  Susanne M Morton; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-09-06       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

Review 6.  Spinal motor patterns in the turtle.

Authors:  P S Stein; M L McCullough; S N Currie
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  1998-11-16       Impact factor: 5.691

7.  Internal models in the cerebellum.

Authors:  D M Wolpert; R C Miall; M Kawato
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  1998-09-01       Impact factor: 20.229

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.  Locomotor adaptation on a split-belt treadmill can improve walking symmetry post-stroke.

Authors:  Darcy S Reisman; Robert Wityk; Kenneth Silver; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2007-04-02       Impact factor: 13.501

10.  Uncertainty of feedback and state estimation determines the speed of motor adaptation.

Authors:  Kunlin Wei; Konrad Körding
Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci       Date:  2010-05-11       Impact factor: 2.380

View more
  45 in total

1.  How does the motor system correct for errors in time and space during locomotor adaptation?

Authors:  Laura A Malone; Amy J Bastian; Gelsy Torres-Oviedo
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Natural error patterns enable transfer of motor learning to novel contexts.

Authors:  Gelsy Torres-Oviedo; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-09-28       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Gait speed influences aftereffect size following locomotor adaptation, but only in certain environments.

Authors:  Rami J Hamzey; Eileen M Kirk; Erin V L Vasudevan
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Blocking trial-by-trial error correction does not interfere with motor learning in human walking.

Authors:  Andrew W Long; Ryan T Roemmich; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  A marching-walking hybrid induces step length adaptation and transfers to natural walking.

Authors:  Andrew W Long; James M Finley; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Locomotor control of limb force switches from minimal intervention principle in early adaptation to noise reduction in late adaptation.

Authors:  Brian P Selgrade; Young-Hui Chang
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2014-12-04       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Using dual tasks to test immediate transfer of training between naturalistic movements: a proof-of-principle study.

Authors:  Sydney Y Schaefer; Catherine E Lang
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 1.328

8.  Postural dependence of human locomotion during gait initiation.

Authors:  Marie-Laure Mille; Martin Simoneau; Mark W Rogers
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2014-09-17       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Generalization of improved step length symmetry from treadmill to overground walking in persons with stroke and hemiparesis.

Authors:  Douglas N Savin; Susanne M Morton; Jill Whitall
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 3.708

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.