Literature DB >> 33656948

Individual differences in proprioception predict the extent of implicit sensorimotor adaptation.

Jonathan S Tsay1,2, Hyosub E Kim3, Darius E Parvin1,2, Alissa R Stover1, Richard B Ivry1,3.   

Abstract

Recent studies have revealed an upper bound in motor adaptation, beyond which other learning systems may be recruited. The factors determining this upper bound are poorly understood. The multisensory integration hypothesis states that this limit arises from opposing responses to visual and proprioceptive feedback. As individuals adapt to a visual perturbation, they experience an increasing proprioceptive error in the opposite direction, and the upper bound is the point where these two error signals reach an equilibrium. Assuming that visual and proprioceptive feedback are weighted according to their variability, there should be a correlation between proprioceptive variability and the limits of adaptation. Alternatively, the proprioceptive realignment hypothesis states that the upper bound arises when the (visually biased) sensed hand position realigns with the expected sensed position (target). When a visuo-proprioceptive discrepancy is introduced, the sensed hand position is biased toward the visual cursor, and the adaptive system counteracts this discrepancy by driving the hand away from the target. This hypothesis predicts a correlation between the size of the proprioceptive shift and the upper bound of adaptation. We tested these two hypotheses by considering natural variation in proprioception and motor adaptation across individuals. We observed a modest, yet reliable correlation between the upper bound of adaptation with both proprioceptive measures (variability and shift). Although the results do not clearly favor one hypothesis over the other, they underscore the critical role of proprioception in sensorimotor adaptation.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Although the sensorimotor system uses sensory feedback to remain calibrated, this learning process is constrained, limited by the maximum degree of plasticity. The factors determining this limit remain elusive. Guided by two hypotheses, we show that individual differences in the upper bound of adaptation in response to a visual perturbation can be predicted by the bias and variability in proprioception. These results underscore the critical, but often neglected role of proprioception in human motor learning.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cross-sensory calibration; error-based learning; motor learning; proprioception; sensorimotor adaptation

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33656948      PMCID: PMC8282225          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00585.2020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.974


  67 in total

1.  Implicit and explicit components of dual adaptation to visuomotor rotations.

Authors:  Mathias Hegele; Herbert Heuer
Journal:  Conscious Cogn       Date:  2010-12

2.  Sensory prediction errors drive cerebellum-dependent adaptation of reaching.

Authors:  Ya-Weng Tseng; Jörn Diedrichsen; John W Krakauer; Reza Shadmehr; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2007-05-16       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Characteristics of Implicit Sensorimotor Adaptation Revealed by Task-irrelevant Clamped Feedback.

Authors:  J Ryan Morehead; Jordan A Taylor; Darius E Parvin; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2017-02-14       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  The precision of proprioceptive position sense.

Authors:  R J van Beers; A C Sittig; J J Denier van der Gon
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  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

6.  Time Course of Reach Adaptation and Proprioceptive Recalibration during Visuomotor Learning.

Authors:  Jennifer E Ruttle; Erin K Cressman; Bernard Marius 't Hart; Denise Y P Henriques
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-10-12       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Multisensory integration during motor planning.

Authors:  Samuel J Sober; Philip N Sabes
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-08-06       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 8.  Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs.

Authors:  Daniël Lakens
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-11-26

9.  Accuracy of hand localization is subject-specific and improved without performance feedback.

Authors:  Tianhe Wang; Ziyan Zhu; Inoue Kana; Yuanzheng Yu; Hao He; Kunlin Wei
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-11-05       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  External error attribution dampens efferent-based predictions but not proprioceptive changes in hand localization.

Authors:  Raphael Q Gastrock; Shanaathanan Modchalingam; Bernard Marius 't Hart; Denise Y P Henriques
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-11-16       Impact factor: 4.379

View more
  10 in total

1.  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

2.  Reexposure to a sensorimotor perturbation produces opposite effects on explicit and implicit learning processes.

Authors:  Guy Avraham; J Ryan Morehead; Hyosub E Kim; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 8.029

3.  Individual Differences in Sensorimotor Adaptation Are Conserved Over Time and Across Force-Field Tasks.

Authors:  Robert T Moore; Tyler Cluff
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 3.169

4.  Long-Term Motor Learning in the "Wild" With High Volume Video Game Data.

Authors:  Jennifer B Listman; Jonathan S Tsay; Hyosub E Kim; Wayne E Mackey; David J Heeger
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2021-12-20       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  Balance Adaptation While Standing on a Compliant Base Depends on the Current Sensory Condition in Healthy Young Adults.

Authors:  Stefania Sozzi; Marco Schieppati
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2022-03-25       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  Dissociable use-dependent processes for volitional goal-directed reaching.

Authors:  Jonathan S Tsay; Hyosub E Kim; Arohi Saxena; Darius E Parvin; Timothy Verstynen; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 5.530

7.  Prolonged Feedback Duration Does Not Affect Implicit Recalibration in a Visuomotor Rotation Task.

Authors:  Jana Maresch; Opher Donchin
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2022-04-20

Review 8.  Using Artificial Intelligence for Assistance Systems to Bring Motor Learning Principles into Real World Motor Tasks.

Authors:  Koenraad Vandevoorde; Lukas Vollenkemper; Constanze Schwan; Martin Kohlhase; Wolfram Schenck
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 3.576

9.  Understanding implicit sensorimotor adaptation as a process of proprioceptive re-alignment.

Authors:  Jonathan S Tsay; Hyosub Kim; Adrian M Haith; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2022-08-15       Impact factor: 8.713

10.  Interactions between sensory prediction error and task error during implicit motor learning.

Authors:  Jonathan S Tsay; Adrian M Haith; Richard B Ivry; Hyosub E Kim
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 4.779

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.