Literature DB >> 21957223

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

Gelsy Torres-Oviedo1, Amy J Bastian.   

Abstract

Successful behavior demands motor learning to be transferable in some cases (e.g., adjusting walking patterns as we develop and age) and context specific in others (e.g., learning to walk in high heels). Here we investigated differences in motor learning transfer in people learning a new walking pattern on a split-belt treadmill, where the legs move at different speeds. We hypothesized that transfer of the newly acquired walking pattern on the treadmill to natural over ground walking might depend on the pattern of errors experienced during learning. Error patterns within a person's natural range might be experienced as endogenous (i.e., produced by the body), encouraging general adjustments that transfer across contexts. On the other hand, larger errors might be experienced as exogenous (i.e., produced by the environment), indicating unusual conditions requiring context-specific learning. To test this, we manipulated the distribution of errors experienced during learning to lie either within or outside the normal distribution of walking errors. We found that restriction of errors to the natural range produced transfer of the new walking pattern from the treadmill to natural walking off the treadmill, while larger errors prevented transfer. This result helps explain how transfer of motor learning is controlled, and it offers an important strategy for clinical rehabilitation, where transfer of motor learning to other contexts is essential.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21957223      PMCID: PMC3349698          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00570.2011

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


  40 in total

1.  System identification applied to a visuomotor task: near-optimal human performance in a noisy changing task.

Authors:  R J Baddeley; H A Ingram; R C Miall
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-04-01       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 2.  Motor learning and prediction in a variable environment.

Authors:  Paul R Davidson; Daniel M Wolpert
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 6.627

3.  Persistence of motor memories reflects statistics of the learning event.

Authors:  Vincent S Huang; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-06-03       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  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

5.  Locomotor adaptation and aftereffects in patients with reduced somatosensory input due to peripheral neuropathy.

Authors:  Karen L Bunday; Adolfo M Bronstein
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-09-09       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Younger is not always better: development of locomotor adaptation from childhood to adulthood.

Authors:  Erin V L Vasudevan; Gelsy Torres-Oviedo; Susanne M Morton; Jaynie F Yang; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-02-23       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Adaptive gain control of saccadic eye movements.

Authors:  H Deubel; W Wolf; G Hauske
Journal:  Hum Neurobiol       Date:  1986

8.  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

9.  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

10.  The moving platform aftereffect: limited generalization of a locomotor adaptation.

Authors:  R F Reynolds; A M Bronstein
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2003-08-27       Impact factor: 2.714

View more
  60 in total

1.  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

2.  Individuals Poststroke Do Not Perceive Their Spatiotemporal Gait Asymmetries as Abnormal.

Authors:  Clinton J Wutzke; Richard A Faldowski; Michael D Lewek
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2015-04-02

3.  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

4.  Different Error Size During Locomotor Adaptation Affects Transfer to Overground Walking Poststroke.

Authors:  Carolina C Alcântara; Charalambos C Charalambous; Susanne M Morton; Thiago L Russo; Darcy S Reisman
Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair       Date:  2018-11-09       Impact factor: 3.919

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.  Formation of model-free motor memories during motor adaptation depends on perturbation schedule.

Authors:  Jean-Jacques Orban de Xivry; Philippe Lefèvre
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-02-11       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Robotic therapy for chronic stroke: general recovery of impairment or improved task-specific skill?

Authors:  Tomoko Kitago; Jeff Goldsmith; Michelle Harran; Leslie Kane; Jessica Berard; Sylvia Huang; Sophia L Ryan; Pietro Mazzoni; John W Krakauer; Vincent S Huang
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  The effects of variable practice on locomotor adaptation to a novel asymmetric gait.

Authors:  Jacob W Hinkel-Lipsker; Michael E Hahn
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-06-24       Impact factor: 1.972

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.  Did I do that? Detecting a perturbation to visual feedback in a reaching task.

Authors:  Elon Gaffin-Cahn; Todd E Hudson; Michael S Landy
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 2.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.