Literature DB >> 28356480

Estimating the implicit component of visuomotor rotation learning by constraining movement preparation time.

Li-Ann Leow1, Reece Gunn2, Welber Marinovic2,3, Timothy J Carroll2.   

Abstract

When sensory feedback is perturbed, accurate movement is restored by a combination of implicit processes and deliberate reaiming to strategically compensate for errors. Here, we directly compare two methods used previously to dissociate implicit from explicit learning on a trial-by-trial basis: 1) asking participants to report the direction that they aim their movements, and contrasting this with the directions of the target and the movement that they actually produce, and 2) manipulating movement preparation time. By instructing participants to reaim without a sensory perturbation, we show that reaiming is possible even with the shortest possible preparation times, particularly when targets are narrowly distributed. Nonetheless, reaiming is effortful and comes at the cost of increased variability, so we tested whether constraining preparation time is sufficient to suppress strategic reaiming during adaptation to visuomotor rotation with a broad target distribution. The rate and extent of error reduction under preparation time constraints were similar to estimates of implicit learning obtained from self-report without time pressure, suggesting that participants chose not to apply a reaiming strategy to correct visual errors under time pressure. Surprisingly, participants who reported aiming directions showed less implicit learning according to an alternative measure, obtained during trials performed without visual feedback. This suggests that the process of reporting can affect the extent or persistence of implicit learning. The data extend existing evidence that restricting preparation time can suppress explicit reaiming and provide an estimate of implicit visuomotor rotation learning that does not require participants to report their aiming directions.NEW & NOTEWORTHY During sensorimotor adaptation, implicit error-driven learning can be isolated from explicit strategy-driven reaiming by subtracting self-reported aiming directions from movement directions, or by restricting movement preparation time. Here, we compared the two methods. Restricting preparation times did not eliminate reaiming but was sufficient to suppress reaiming during adaptation with widely distributed targets. The self-report method produced a discrepancy in implicit learning estimated by subtracting aiming directions and implicit learning measured in no-feedback trials.
Copyright © 2017 the American Physiological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  compensatory strategies; explicit learning; implicit learning; motor learning; visuomotor rotation

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28356480      PMCID: PMC5539449          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00834.2016

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


  32 in total

1.  An implicit plan overrides an explicit strategy during visuomotor adaptation.

Authors:  Pietro Mazzoni; John W Krakauer
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-04-05       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  The time course of amplitude specification in brief interceptive actions.

Authors:  Welber Marinovic; Annaliese Plooy; James R Tresilian
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-04-16       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Adaptation to visuomotor rotations in younger and older adults.

Authors:  Herbert Heuer; Mathias Hegele
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2008-03

4.  A spatial explicit strategy reduces error but interferes with sensorimotor adaptation.

Authors:  Bryan L Benson; Joaquin A Anguera; Rachael D Seidler
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-03-30       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Explicit and implicit components of visuo-motor adaptation: An analysis of individual differences.

Authors:  Herbert Heuer; Mathias Hegele
Journal:  Conscious Cogn       Date:  2015-01-12

6.  The influence of movement preparation time on the expression of visuomotor learning and savings.

Authors:  Adrian M Haith; David M Huberdeau; John W Krakauer
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Target size matters: target errors contribute to the generalization of implicit visuomotor learning.

Authors:  Maayan Reichenthal; Guy Avraham; Amir Karniel; Lior Shmuelof
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Role of cognitive factors on adaptation to prismatic displacement.

Authors:  J J Uhlarik
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1973-05

9.  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

10.  Secondary tasks impair adaptation to step- and gradual-visual displacements.

Authors:  J M Galea; S A Sami; N B Albert; R C Miall
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-01-26       Impact factor: 1.972

View more
  23 in total

1.  Using gaze behavior to parcellate the explicit and implicit contributions to visuomotor learning.

Authors:  Anouk J de Brouwer; Mohammed Albaghdadi; J Randall Flanagan; Jason P Gallivan
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2018-07-11       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Task Errors Drive Memories That Improve Sensorimotor Adaptation.

Authors:  Li-Ann Leow; Welber Marinovic; Aymar de Rugy; Timothy J Carroll
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 3.  A tale of too many tasks: task fragmentation in motor learning and a call for model task paradigms.

Authors:  Rajiv Ranganathan; Aimee D Tomlinson; Rakshith Lokesh; Tzu-Hsiang Lin; Priya Patel
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2020-11-10       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Contribution of explicit processes to reinforcement-based motor learning.

Authors:  Peter Holland; Olivier Codol; Joseph M Galea
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2018-03-14       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Competition between parallel sensorimotor learning systems.

Authors:  Scott T Albert; Jihoon Jang; Shanaathanan Modchalingam; Bernard Marius 't Hart; Denise Henriques; Gonzalo Lerner; Valeria Della-Maggiore; Adrian M Haith; John W Krakauer; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 8.713

6.  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

7.  De novo learning versus adaptation of continuous control in a manual tracking task.

Authors:  Christopher S Yang; Noah J Cowan; Adrian M Haith
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 8.140

8.  Prolonged response time helps eliminate residual errors in visuomotor adaptation.

Authors:  Samuel D McDougle; Raphael Schween; Lisa Langsdorf; Jana Maresch; Mathias Hegele
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2021-01-22

9.  An implicit memory of errors limits human sensorimotor adaptation.

Authors:  Scott T Albert; Jihoon Jang; Hannah R Sheahan; Lonneke Teunissen; Koenraad Vandevoorde; David J Herzfeld; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2021-02-04

10.  Causal Role of Motor Preparation during Error-Driven Learning.

Authors:  Saurabh Vyas; Daniel J O'Shea; Stephen I Ryu; Krishna V Shenoy
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2020-02-12       Impact factor: 17.173

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.