Enhancing Generalization of Visuomotor Adaptation by Inducing Use-dependent Learning

Lei, Yuming; Bao, Shancheng; Pérez, Mónica A.; Wang, Jinsung

doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2017.10.004

Cited by 17 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[2, 4, 25] vs. 30-deg. [3, 13, 15, 16] rotation) and whether the perturbation is provided gradually or abruptly (which in turn can influence the size of aftereffects [2, 20, 22]). The awareness of the perturbation can also vary across individuals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was assumed that this condition only involved explicit learning because the subjects were completely aware of the task goal (i.e., to reach toward the imaginary targets based on an instruction provided by the experimenters). In the latter, subjects were asked to reach toward visual targets under a novel visuomotor rotation condition, which is the typical condition employed in many previous studies in which subjects were not informed of the visuomotor perturbation [9–15]. Though it is possible that this condition may also involve explicit components, it was assumed that it mainly involved implicit learning because the subjects were unaware of the task goal (i.e., adapt to the novel visuomotor rotation while reaching toward visual targets).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lack of generalization between explicit and implicit visuomotor learning

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visuomotor adaptation has been thought to occur implicitly, although recent findings suggest that it involves both explicit and implicit processes. Here, we investigated generalization between an explicit condition, in which subjects reached toward imaginary targets under a veridical visuomotor condition, and an implicit condition, in which subjects reached toward visual targets under a 30-degree counterclockwise rotation condition. In experiment 1, two groups of healthy young adults first experienced either the explicit or the implicit condition, then the other condition. The third group experienced the explicit, then the implicit condition with an instruction that the same cognitive strategy could be used in both conditions. Results showed that initial explicit learning did not facilitate subsequent implicit learning, or vice versa, in the first two groups. Subjects in the third group performed better at the beginning of the implicit condition, but still had to adapt to the rotation gradually. In experiment 2, three additional subject groups were tested. One group experienced the explicit, then an implicit condition in which the rotation direction was opposite (30-degree clockwise rotation). Generalization between the conditions was still minimal in that group. Two other groups experienced either the explicit or implicit condition, then performed reaching movements without visual feedback. Those who experienced the explicit condition did not demonstrate aftereffects, while those who experienced the implicit condition did. Collectively, these findings suggest that visuomotor adaptation primarily involves implicit processes, and that explicit processes can add up in a complementary fashion as individuals become increasingly aware of the perturbation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lack of generalization between explicit and implicit visuomotor learning

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, we predict that M1 excitability for the ECR muscle during the static condition could have been heightened by the difference of proprioceptive and visual information. Sensorimotor adaptation functionally involves updating an efference copy that estimates the sensory consequences of motor commands (Shadmehr and Mussa-Ivaldi, 1994; Lei et al, 2017). A previous study (Witham et al, 2010) suggested that M1 contributes to the modification of the efference copy, and M1 excitability changes induced by sensorimotor tasks generally take the form of increased excitability (Rosenkranz et al, 2007; Smyth et al, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential Effect of Visual and Proprioceptive Stimulation on Corticospinal Output for Reciprocal Muscles

Suzuki

Kanemura

Hamaguchi

2019

Front. Integr. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the corticospinal excitability of reciprocal muscles during tasks involving sensory difference between proprioceptive and visual inputs. Participants were instructed to relax their muscles and to observe a screen during vibratory stimulation. A video screen was placed on the board covering the right hand and forearm. Participants were randomly tested in four conditions: resting, control, static, and dynamic. The resting condition involved showing a black screen, the control condition, a mosaic patterned static videoclip; the static condition, a static videoclip of wrist flexion 0°; and the dynamic condition, a videoclip that corresponded to each participant’s closely-matched illusory wrist flexion angle and speed by vibration. Vibratory stimulation (frequency 80 Hz and duration 4 s) was applied to the distal tendon of the dominant right extensor carpi radialis (ECR) using a tendon vibrator in the control, static, and dynamic conditions. Four seconds after the vibratory stimulation (end of vibration), the primary motor cortex at the midpoint between the centers of gravity of the flexor carpi radialis (FCR) and ECR muscles was stimulated by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). The ECR motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes significantly increased in the control condition compared to the resting condition, whereas the FCR MEP amplitudes did not change between the resting and control conditions. In addition, the ECR MEP amplitudes significantly increased in the static condition compared to the dynamic condition. However, the FCR MEP amplitudes significantly increased in the dynamic condition compared to the static condition. These results imply that the difference between visuo-proprioceptive information had an effect on corticospinal excitability for the muscle. In conclusion, we found that proprioceptive and visual information differentially altered the corticospinal excitability of reciprocal muscles.

show abstract

“…Second, that these mechanisms might generalize across contexts differently. There is an ongoing debate regarding the first assumption [31, 37, 39, 40], however, it has been suggested that generalization of model-free learning based on reinforcement signals contributes only locally and to a limited extent to generalization [41, 42].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive coupling influences generalization of sensorimotor learning

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensorimotor learning typically shows generalization from one context to another. Models of sensorimotor learning characterize this with a fixed generalization function that couples learning between contexts. Here we examine whether such coupling is indeed fixed or changes with experience. We examine the interaction between motor memories for novel dynamics during reciprocating, back and forth reaching movements. Subjects first experienced a force field for one movement direction and we used channel trials to assess generalization on the reciprocal movements. This showed minimal coupling such that errors experienced for one movement direction did not lead to adaptation for the other. However, after subjects had experienced a force field for both movement directions concurrently, a coupling developed between the corresponding motor memories. That is, on re-exposure for one direction there was a significant adaptation for movements in the other direction. The coupling was specific to the errors experienced, with minimal coupling when the errors had the opposite sign to those experienced during adaptation. We developed a state-space model in which the states for the two movement directions are represented by separate, yet potentially coupled learning processes. The coupling in the model controlled the extent to which each learning process was updated by the errors experienced on the other movement direction. We show that the coupling relies on a memory trace of the consecutive errors experienced for both movement directions. Our results suggest that the generalization of motor learning is an adaptive process, reflecting the relation between errors experienced across different movements.

show abstract

Enhancing Generalization of Visuomotor Adaptation by Inducing Use-dependent Learning

Cited by 17 publications

References 60 publications

Lack of generalization between explicit and implicit visuomotor learning

Lack of generalization between explicit and implicit visuomotor learning

Differential Effect of Visual and Proprioceptive Stimulation on Corticospinal Output for Reciprocal Muscles

Adaptive coupling influences generalization of sensorimotor learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About