Literature DB >> 25274819

Fast but fleeting: adaptive motor learning processes associated with aging and cognitive decline.

Kevin M Trewartha1, Angeles Garcia2, Daniel M Wolpert3, J Randall Flanagan4.   

Abstract

Motor learning has been shown to depend on multiple interacting learning processes. For example, learning to adapt when moving grasped objects with novel dynamics involves a fast process that adapts and decays quickly-and that has been linked to explicit memory-and a slower process that adapts and decays more gradually. Each process is characterized by a learning rate that controls how strongly motor memory is updated based on experienced errors and a retention factor determining the movement-to-movement decay in motor memory. Here we examined whether fast and slow motor learning processes involved in learning novel dynamics differ between younger and older adults. In addition, we investigated how age-related decline in explicit memory performance influences learning and retention parameters. Although the groups adapted equally well, they did so with markedly different underlying processes. Whereas the groups had similar fast processes, they had different slow processes. Specifically, the older adults exhibited decreased retention in their slow process compared with younger adults. Within the older group, who exhibited considerable variation in explicit memory performance, we found that poor explicit memory was associated with reduced retention in the fast process, as well as the slow process. These findings suggest that explicit memory resources are a determining factor in impairments in the both the fast and slow processes for motor learning but that aging effects on the slow process are independent of explicit memory declines.
Copyright © 2014 the authors 0270-6474/14/3413411-11$15.00/0.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aging; explicit memory; human; motor control; motor learning; state-space model

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25274819      PMCID: PMC4180475          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1489-14.2014

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


  52 in total

1.  Kinematics and dynamics are not represented independently in motor working memory: evidence from an interference study.

Authors:  Christine Tong; Daniel M Wolpert; J Randall Flanagan
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2002-02-01       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Individual differences and predictors of forgetting in old age: the role of processing speed and working memory.

Authors:  Daniel Zimprich; Tanja Kurtz
Journal:  Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn       Date:  2012-06-14

3.  Spontaneous recovery of motor memory during saccade adaptation.

Authors:  Vincent Ethier; David S Zee; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-03-19       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Long-term perceptual memory for briefly exposed words as a function of awareness and attention.

Authors:  K J Hawley; W A Johnston
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Older adults learn less, but still reduce metabolic cost, during motor adaptation.

Authors:  Helen J Huang; Alaa A Ahmed
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Throwing while looking through prisms. I. Focal olivocerebellar lesions impair adaptation.

Authors:  T A Martin; J G Keating; H P Goodkin; A J Bastian; W T Thach
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 13.501

7.  Reduction in learning rates associated with anterograde interference results from interactions between different timescales in motor adaptation.

Authors:  Gary C Sing; Maurice A Smith
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 4.475

8.  Multiple grasp-specific representations of tool dynamics mediate skillful manipulation.

Authors:  James N Ingram; Ian S Howard; J Randall Flanagan; Daniel M Wolpert
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2010-03-25       Impact factor: 10.834

9.  Flexible cognitive strategies during motor learning.

Authors:  Jordan A Taylor; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2011-03-03       Impact factor: 4.475

10.  Age effects on explicit and implicit memory.

Authors:  Emma V Ward; Christopher J Berry; David R Shanks
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-09-23
View more
  42 in total

1.  Explicit and Implicit Processes Constitute the Fast and Slow Processes of Sensorimotor Learning.

Authors:  Samuel D McDougle; Krista M Bond; Jordan A Taylor
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Both fast and slow learning processes contribute to savings following sensorimotor adaptation.

Authors:  Susan K Coltman; Joshua G A Cashaback; Paul L Gribble
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Corticospinal correlates of fast and slow adaptive processes in motor learning.

Authors:  Adjmal M E Sarwary; Miles Wischnewski; Dennis J L G Schutter; Luc P J Selen; W Pieter Medendorp
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2018-08-22       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Distinct contributions of explicit and implicit memory processes to weight prediction when lifting objects and judging their weights: an aging study.

Authors:  Kevin M Trewartha; J Randall Flanagan
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-06-15       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 5.  Computations in Sensorimotor Learning.

Authors:  Daniel M Wolpert
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol       Date:  2015-04-07

6.  Estimating properties of the fast and slow adaptive processes during sensorimotor adaptation.

Authors:  Scott T Albert; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-11-29       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 7.  Computations underlying sensorimotor learning.

Authors:  Daniel M Wolpert; J Randall Flanagan
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2015-12-23       Impact factor: 6.627

Review 8.  Taking Aim at the Cognitive Side of Learning in Sensorimotor Adaptation Tasks.

Authors:  Samuel D McDougle; Richard B Ivry; Jordan A Taylor
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 20.229

9.  Can patients with cerebellar disease switch learning mechanisms to reduce their adaptation deficits?

Authors:  Aaron L Wong; Cherie L Marvel; Jordan A Taylor; John W Krakauer
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 13.501

10.  Motor memories in manipulation tasks are linked to contact goals between objects.

Authors:  Michael R McGarity-Shipley; James B Heald; James N Ingram; Jason P Gallivan; Daniel M Wolpert; J Randall Flanagan
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-08-20       Impact factor: 2.714

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.