The present study compared the contribution of visual information of hand and target position to the online control of goal-directed arm movements. Their respective contributions were assessed by examining how human subjects reacted to a change of the position of either their seen hand or the visual target near the onset of the reaching movement. Subjects, seated head-fixed in a dark room, were instructed to look at and reach with a pointer towards visual targets located in the fronto-parallel plane at different distances to the right of the starting position. LEDs mounted on the tip of the pointer were used to provide true or erroneous visual feedback about hand position. In some trials, either the target or the pointer LED that signalled the actual hand position was shifted 4.5 cm to the left or to the right during the ocular saccade towards the target. Because of saccadic suppression, subjects did not perceive these displacements, which occurred near arm movement onset. The results showed that modifications of arm movement amplitude appeared, on average, 150 ms earlier and reached a greater extent (mean difference=2.7 cm) when there was a change of target position than when a change of the seen hand position occurred. These findings highlight the weight of target position information to the online control of arm movements. Visual information relative to hand position may be less contributive because proprioception also provides information about limb position.

The role of proprioception in the control and adaptation of visuomotor relationships is still unclear. We have studied a deafferented subject, IW, and control subjects in a task in which they used single joint elbow extension to move to a visual target, with visual feedback of the terminal position provided by a cursor displayed in the plane of their movements. We report the differences in movement accuracy between the deafferented subject and controls in the normal task and when challenged with a cognitive load, counting backwards. All subjects were less accurate when counting; this was a small effect for the controls (<10% change) but much greater for the deafferented subject (>60% change). We also examined changes in movement kinematics when the instructed amplitude was altered via a changed gain between final arm position and presentation of the feedback cursor. The deafferented subject maintained temporal movement parameters stable and altered amplitude by scaling force (i.e. changed peak velocity), whereas the controls scaled both movement velocity and duration. Finally, we compared the subjects' adaptation of movement amplitude after a period of exposure to the changed visuomotor gain. The deafferented subject was able to adapt, but his adaptation was severely impaired by the counting task. These results suggest that proprioception is not an absolute requirement for adaptation to occur. Instead, proprioception has a more subtle role to play in the adjustment to visuomotor perturbations. It has an important role in the control of reaching movements, while in the absence of proprioception, attention appears necessary to monitor movements.

No abstract