Literature DB >> 28794198

The absence or temporal offset of visual feedback does not influence adaptation to novel movement dynamics.

Erin McKenna1, Laurence C Jayet Bray2, Weiwei Zhou2, Wilsaan M Joiner3,2,4.   

Abstract

Delays in transmitting and processing sensory information require correctly associating delayed feedback to issued motor commands for accurate error compensation. The flexibility of this alignment between motor signals and feedback has been demonstrated for movement recalibration to visual manipulations, but the alignment dependence for adapting movement dynamics is largely unknown. Here we examined the effect of visual feedback manipulations on force-field adaptation. Three subject groups used a manipulandum while experiencing a lag in the corresponding cursor motion (0, 75, or 150 ms). When the offset was applied at the start of the session (continuous condition), adaptation was not significantly different between groups. However, these similarities may be due to acclimation to the offset before motor adaptation. We tested additional subjects who experienced the same delays concurrent with the introduction of the perturbation (abrupt condition). In this case adaptation was statistically indistinguishable from the continuous condition, indicating that acclimation to feedback delay was not a factor. In addition, end-point errors were not significantly different across the delay or onset conditions, but end-point correction (e.g., deceleration duration) was influenced by the temporal offset. As an additional control, we tested a group of subjects who performed without visual feedback and found comparable movement adaptation results. These results suggest that visual feedback manipulation (absence or temporal misalignment) does not affect adaptation to novel dynamics, independent of both acclimation and perceptual awareness. These findings could have implications for modeling how the motor system adjusts to errors despite concurrent delays in sensory feedback information.NEW & NOTEWORTHY A temporal offset between movement and distorted visual feedback (e.g., visuomotor rotation) influences the subsequent motor recalibration, but the effects of this offset for altered movement dynamics are largely unknown. Here we examined the influence of 1) delayed and 2) removed visual feedback on the adaptation to novel movement dynamics. These results contribute to understanding of the control strategies that compensate for movement errors when there is a temporal separation between motion state and sensory information.
Copyright © 2017 the American Physiological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acclimation; motor adaptation; prediction error; sensory feedback; vision

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28794198      PMCID: PMC5646192          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00636.2016

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


  77 in total

1.  Independent learning of internal models for kinematic and dynamic control of reaching.

Authors:  J W Krakauer; M F Ghilardi; C Ghez
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 24.884

Review 2.  Internal models for motor control and trajectory planning.

Authors:  M Kawato
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 6.627

3.  Impedance control and internal model use during the initial stage of adaptation to novel dynamics in humans.

Authors:  Theodore E Milner; David W Franklin
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2005-06-16       Impact factor: 5.182

4.  Is there a preferred coordinate system for perception of hand orientation in three-dimensional space?

Authors:  W G Darling; L Gilchrist
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Long-term retention explained by a model of short-term learning in the adaptive control of reaching.

Authors:  Wilsaan M Joiner; Maurice A Smith
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Feedback: real-time delayed vision of one's own tracking behavior.

Authors:  W M Smith
Journal:  Science       Date:  1972-05-26       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Effects of delayed visual information on the rate and amount of prism adaptation in the human.

Authors:  S Kitazawa; T Kohno; T Uka
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Impairments of reaching movements in patients without proprioception. I. Spatial errors.

Authors:  J Gordon; M F Ghilardi; C Ghez
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 9.  The roles of vision and proprioception in the planning of reaching movements.

Authors:  Fabrice R Sarlegna; Robert L Sainburg
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.622

10.  The Decay of Motor Memories Is Independent of Context Change Detection.

Authors:  Andrew E Brennan; Maurice A Smith
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 4.475

View more
  6 in total

1.  The 24-h savings of adaptation to novel movement dynamics initially reflects the recall of previous performance.

Authors:  Katrina P Nguyen; Weiwei Zhou; Erin McKenna; Katrina Colucci-Chang; Laurence C Jayet Bray; Eghbal A Hosseini; Laith Alhussein; Meena Rezazad; Wilsaan M Joiner
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2019-07-10       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Exposure to Auditory Feedback Delay while Speaking Induces Perceptual Habituation but does not Mitigate the Disruptive Effect of Delay on Speech Auditory-motor Learning.

Authors:  Douglas M Shiller; Takashi Mitsuya; Ludo Max
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 3.590

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.  Measuring motion-to-photon latency for sensorimotor experiments with virtual reality systems.

Authors:  Matthew Warburton; Mark Mon-Williams; Faisal Mushtaq; J Ryan Morehead
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-10-10

5.  Slowing the body slows down time perception.

Authors:  Rose De Kock; Weiwei Zhou; Wilsaan M Joiner; Martin Wiener
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 8.140

6.  Motion state-dependent motor learning based on explicit visual feedback is quickly recalled, but is less stable than adaptation to physical perturbations.

Authors:  Weiwei Zhou; Elizabeth A Kruse; Rylee Brower; Ryan North; Wilsaan M Joiner
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2022-08-31       Impact factor: 2.974

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.