Literature DB >> 26156381

Generalization and transfer of contextual cues in motor learning.

A M E Sarwary1, D F Stegeman2, L P J Selen3, W P Medendorp3.   

Abstract

We continuously adapt our movements in daily life, forming new internal models whenever necessary and updating existing ones. Recent work has suggested that this flexibility is enabled via sensorimotor cues, serving to access the correct internal model whenever necessary and keeping new models apart from previous ones. While research to date has mainly focused on identifying the nature of such cue representations, here we investigated whether and how these cue representations generalize, interfere, and transfer within and across effector systems. Subjects were trained to make two-stage reaching movements: a premovement that served as a cue, followed by a targeted movement that was perturbed by one of two opposite curl force fields. The direction of the premovement was uniquely coupled to the direction of the ensuing force field, enabling simultaneous learning of the two respective internal models. After training, generalization of the two premovement cues' representations was tested at untrained premovement directions, within both the trained and untrained hand. We show that the individual premovement representations generalize in a Gaussian-like pattern around the trained premovement direction. When the force fields are of unequal strengths, the cue-dependent generalization skews toward the strongest field. Furthermore, generalization patterns transfer to the nontrained hand, in an extrinsic reference frame. We conclude that contextual cues do not serve as discrete switches between multiple internal models. Instead, their generalization suggests a weighted contribution of the associated internal models based on the angular separation from the trained cues to the net motor output.
Copyright © 2015 the American Physiological Society.

Keywords:  contextual cues; generalization; interlimb transfer; motor adaptation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26156381      PMCID: PMC4563027          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00217.2015

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


  32 in total

1.  Learning of action through adaptive combination of motor primitives.

Authors:  K A Thoroughman; R Shadmehr
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-10-12       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Persistence of motor adaptation during constrained, multi-joint, arm movements.

Authors:  R A Scheidt; D J Reinkensmeyer; M A Conditt; W Z Rymer; F A Mussa-Ivaldi
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  The training schedule affects the stability, not the magnitude, of the interlimb transfer of learned dynamics.

Authors:  Wilsaan M Joiner; Jordan B Brayanov; Maurice A Smith
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-05-29       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Vestibular benefits to task savings in motor adaptation.

Authors:  A M E Sarwary; L P J Selen; W P Medendorp
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Cerebellar contributions to reach adaptation and learning sensory consequences of action.

Authors:  Jun Izawa; Sarah E Criscimagna-Hemminger; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  A modular planar robotic manipulandum with end-point torque control.

Authors:  Ian S Howard; James N Ingram; Daniel M Wolpert
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2009-05-18       Impact factor: 2.390

7.  Specificity of reflex adaptation for task-relevant variability.

Authors:  David W Franklin; Daniel M Wolpert
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2008-12-24       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Differentiating between two models of motor lateralization.

Authors:  Britne A Shabbott; Robert L Sainburg
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Neural Tuning Functions Underlie Both Generalization and Interference.

Authors:  Ian S Howard; David W Franklin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Motor learning of novel dynamics is not represented in a single global coordinate system: evaluation of mixed coordinate representations and local learning.

Authors:  Max Berniker; David W Franklin; J Randall Flanagan; Daniel M Wolpert; Konrad Kording
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-12-18       Impact factor: 2.714

View more
  14 in total

1.  To transfer or not to transfer? Kinematics and laterality quotient predict interlimb transfer of motor learning.

Authors:  Hannah Z Lefumat; Jean-Louis Vercher; R Chris Miall; Jonathan Cole; Frank Buloup; Lionel Bringoux; Christophe Bourdin; Fabrice R Sarlegna
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Assessing explicit strategies in force field adaptation.

Authors:  Raphael Schween; Samuel D McDougle; Mathias Hegele; Jordan A Taylor
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-03-25       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 3.  Computations underlying sensorimotor learning.

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

4.  Tagging motor memories with transcranial direct current stimulation allows later artificially-controlled retrieval.

Authors:  Daichi Nozaki; Atsushi Yokoi; Takahiro Kimura; Masaya Hirashima; Jean-Jacques Orban de Xivry
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2016-07-29       Impact factor: 8.140

5.  Active lead-in variability affects motor memory formation and slows motor learning.

Authors:  Ian S Howard; Christopher Ford; Angelo Cangelosi; David W Franklin
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Pre- and postoperative postural regulation following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Thomas Bartels; Kay Brehme; Martin Pyschik; Stephan Schulze; Karl-Stefan Delank; Georg Fieseler; Kevin G Laudner; Souhail Hermassi; René Schwesig
Journal:  J Exerc Rehabil       Date:  2018-02-26

7.  Adaptive coupling influences generalization of sensorimotor learning.

Authors:  Mohsen Sadeghi; James N Ingram; Daniel M Wolpert
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Plan-based generalization shapes local implicit adaptation to opposing visuomotor transformations.

Authors:  Raphael Schween; Jordan A Taylor; Mathias Hegele
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  How different effectors and action effects modulate the formation of separate motor memories.

Authors:  Raphael Schween; Lisa Langsdorf; Jordan A Taylor; Mathias Hegele
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Adaptive tuning functions arise from visual observation of past movement.

Authors:  Ian S Howard; David W Franklin
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-06-24       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.