Direct and indirect cues can enable dual-adaptation, but through different learning processes

Abstract

Switching between motor tasks requires accurate adjustments for changes in dynamics (grasping a cup) or sensorimotor transformations (moving a computer mouse). Dual-adaptation studies have investigated how learning of context-dependent dynamics or transformations is enabled by sensory cues. However, certain cues, such as color, have shown mixed results. We propose that these mixed results may arise from two major classes of cues: "direct" cues, which are part of the dynamic state and "indirect" cues, which are not. We hypothesized that explicit strategies would primarily account for adaptation for an indirect color cue but would be limited to simple tasks while a direct visual separation cue would allow implicit adaptation regardless of task complexity. To test this idea, we investigated the relative contribution of implicit and explicit learning in relation to contextual cue type (colored or visually shifted workspace) and task complexity (one or eight targets) in a dual-adaptation task. We found that the visual workspace location cue enabled adaptation across conditions primarily through implicit adaptation. In contrast, we found that the color cue was largely ineffective for dual adaptation, except in a small subset of participants who appeared to use explicit strategies. Our study suggests that the previously inconclusive role of color cues in dual-adaptation may be explained by differential contribution of explicit strategies across conditions.

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

“…Another possible limitation is that single target adaptation may favor the use of explicit strategies ( Bond and Taylor, 2015 ). Although single target paradigms favor explicit strategies in visuomotor adaptation ( Bond and Taylor, 2015 ), it is unclear whether a similar influence exists for force-field adaptation ( Forano et al, 2021 ).…”

“…However, the posterior cerebellum may be more involved in visuomotor adaptation and the anterior cerebellum in adapting to force fields ( Rabe et al, 2009 ; Donchin et al, 2011 ). A potential limitation of our experiment was the single-target design which may have led to more rapid adaptation ( Bond and Taylor, 2015 ; Forano et al, 2021 ) and the possibility for ceiling effects that would weaken the correlations between force-field and visuomotor adaptation. However, Figures 7D,E show variability even when participants approached full adaptation, suggesting that ceiling effects alone could not explain the weak correlations between adaptation in the force-field and visuomotor rotation tasks.…”