No abstract

When starting limb and target locations were simultaneously visible in a visuomotor task, performance during prism exposure was nearly perfect, but aftereffects were absent. When starting limb location was not visible, accurate exposure performance was slow to develop, but aftereffects were substantial. Adaptive spatial alignment of sensorimotor spaces and strategic perceptual-motor control to coordinate sensorimotor systems are distinct processes. However, realignment is dependent on whether the exposure task evokes control strategies that enable detection of misalignment. If the task can be performed solely by coding the visible difference between limb and target locations, misalignment detection is disabled. If movement is initiated by target location and then the limb is controlled by the visible difference between target and limb, the discordance between initialized and terminal locations enables misalignment detection and realignment.

No abstract

Prism exposure produces 2 kinds of adaptive response. Recalibration is ordinary strategic remapping of spatially coded movement commands to rapidly reduce performance error. Realignment is the extraordinary process of transforming spatial maps to bring the origins of coordinate systems into correspondence. Realignment occurs when spatial discordance signals noncorrespondence between spatial maps. In Experiment 1, generalization of recalibration aftereffects from prism exposure to postexposure depended upon the similarity of target pointing limb postures. Realignment aftereffects generalized to the spatial maps involved in exposure. In Experiment 2, the 2 kinds of aftereffects were measured for 3 test positions, one of which was the exposure training position. Recalibration aftereffects generalized nonlinearly, while realignment aftereffects generalized linearly, replicating Bedford (1989, 1993a) using a more familiar prism adaptation paradigm. Recalibration and realignment require methods for distinguishing their relative contribution to prism adaptation.

Under spatial misalignment of eye and hand induced by laterally displacing prisms (11.4 degrees in the rightward direction), subjects pointed 60 times (once every 3 s) at a visually implicit target (straight ahead of nose, Experiment 1) or a visually explicit target (an objectively straight-ahead target, Experiment 2). For different groups in each experiment, the hand became visible early in the sagittal pointing movement (early visual feedback). Adaptation to the optical misalignment during exposure (direct effects) was rapid, especially with early feedback; complete compensation for the misalignment was achieved within about 30 trials, and overcompensation occurred in later trials, especially with an explicit target. In contrast, adaptation measured with the misalignment removed and without visual feedback after blocks of 10 pointing trials (aftereffects) was slow to develop, especially with delayed feedback and an implicit target; at most, about 40% compensation for the misalignment occurred after 60 trials. This difference between direct effects and aftereffects is discussed in terms of separable adaptive mechanisms that are activated by different error signals. Adaptive coordination is activated by error feedback and involves centrally located, strategically flexible, short-latency processes to correct for sudden changes in operational precision that normally occur with short-term changes in coordination tasks. Adaptive alignment is activated automatically by spatial discordance between misaligned systems and involves distributed, long-latency processes to correct for slowly developing shifts in alignment among perceptual-motor components that normally occur with long-term drift. The sudden onset of misalignment in experimental situations activates both mechanisms in a complex and not always cooperative manner, which may produce overcompensatory behavior during exposure (i.e., direct effects) and which may limit long-term alignment (i.e., aftereffects).