Literature DB >> 27655964

A switching cost for motor planning.

Jean-Jacques Orban de Xivry1,2, Philippe Lefèvre2.   

Abstract

Movement planning consists of choosing the intended endpoint of the movement and selecting the motor program that will bring the effector on the endpoint. It is widely accepted that movement endpoint is updated on a trial-by-trial basis with respect to the observed errors and that the motor program for a given movement follows the rules of optimal feedback control. In this article, we show clear limitations of these theories. First, participants in the current study could not tune their motor program appropriately for each individual trial. This was true even when the participants selected the width of the target that they reached toward or when they had learned the appropriate motor program previously. These data are compatible with the existence of a switching cost for motor planning, which relates to the drop in performance due to an imposed switch of motor programs. This cost of switching shares many features of costs reported in cognitive task switching experiments and, when tested in the same participants, was correlated with it. Second, we found that randomly changing the width of a target over the course of a reaching experiment prevents the motor system from updating the endpoint of movements on the basis of the performance on the previous trial if the width of the target has changed. These results provide new insights into the process of motor planning and how it relates to optimal control theory and to an action selection based on the reward consequences of the motor program rather than that based on the observed error.
Copyright © 2016 the American Physiological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  motor control; motor planning; optimal control; switching cost

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27655964      PMCID: PMC5168003          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00319.2016

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


  66 in total

Review 1.  Optimal feedback control and the long-latency stretch response.

Authors:  J Andrew Pruszynski; Stephen H Scott
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Influence of the behavioral goal and environmental obstacles on rapid feedback responses.

Authors:  Joseph Y Nashed; Frédéric Crevecoeur; Stephen H Scott
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-05-23       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Information about the weight of grasped objects from vision and internal models interacts within the primary motor cortex.

Authors:  Morrison N Loh; Louise Kirsch; John C Rothwell; Roger N Lemon; Marco Davare
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-05-19       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  The central nervous system does not minimize energy cost in arm movements.

Authors:  Dinant A Kistemaker; Jeremy D Wong; Paul L Gribble
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-09-08       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Dissociating task-set selection from task-set inhibition in the prefrontal cortex.

Authors:  Ulrich Mayr; Jörn Diedrichsen; Richard Ivry; Steven W Keele
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Motor learning is optimally tuned to the properties of motor noise.

Authors:  Robert J van Beers
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2009-08-13       Impact factor: 17.173

7.  Role for cingulate motor area cells in voluntary movement selection based on reward.

Authors:  K Shima; J Tanji
Journal:  Science       Date:  1998-11-13       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 8.  Switching from automatic to controlled behavior: cortico-basal ganglia mechanisms.

Authors:  Okihide Hikosaka; Masaki Isoda
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2010-02-22       Impact factor: 20.229

9.  Fast feedback control involves two independent processes utilizing knowledge of limb dynamics.

Authors:  Isaac Kurtzer; Frédéric Crevecoeur; Stephen H Scott
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Trial-to-trial dynamics and learning in a generalized, redundant reaching task.

Authors:  Jonathan B Dingwell; Rachel F Smallwood; Joseph P Cusumano
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-10-10       Impact factor: 2.714

View more
  5 in total

1.  Overlap of movement planning and movement execution reduces reaction time.

Authors:  Jean-Jacques Orban de Xivry; Valéry Legrain; Philippe Lefèvre
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-10-12       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 2.  Use of the Aplysia feeding network to study repetition priming of an episodic behavior.

Authors:  Elizabeth C Cropper; Jian Jing; Matthew H Perkins; Klaudiusz R Weiss
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Fluid Cognition Relates to Locomotor Switching in Neurotypical Adults, Not Individuals After Stroke.

Authors:  Margaret A French; Matthew L Cohen; Ryan T Pohlig; Darcy S Reisman
Journal:  J Neurol Phys Ther       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 3.649

4.  Roles of the prefrontal cortex in learning to time the onset of pre-existing motor programs.

Authors:  Beom-Chan Lee; Jongkwan Choi; Bernard J Martin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-11-09       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Bimanual Reach to Grasp Movements in Youth With and Without Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Authors:  Rachel A Rodgers; Brittany G Travers; Andrea H Mason
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2019-01-17
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.