Moving outside the lab: The viability of conducting sensorimotor learning studies online

Lee, Alan S.; Ivry, Richard B; Avraham, Guy

doi:10.1101/2021.01.30.181370

Cited by 34 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 103 publications

(175 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That said, our data are typical of many previous lab-based visuomotor adaptation studies, with comparable levels of final performance (Huberdeau et al, 2015;Morehead, Qasim, Crossley, & Ivry, 2015;Vaswani et al, 2015;Neville & Cressman, 2018;Weightman et al, 2020;Weightman, Brittain, Miall, & Jenkinson, 2021). Furthermore, initial evidence suggests that kinematic data and results from online motor learning studies are analogous with those collected in a controlled lab environment (Tsay, Lee, Ivry, & Avraham, 2021) and that online tasks perform well in terms of accuracy and precision with regards to timing of visual stimuli and response capture (Bridges, Pitiot, MacAskill, & Peirce, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Residual errors in visuomotor adaptation persist despite extended motor preparation periods

Weightman

Brittain

Miall

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A consistent finding in sensorimotor adaptation is a persistent undershoot of full compensation, such that performance asymptotes with residual errors greater than seen at baseline. This behaviour has been attributed to limiting factors within the implicit adaptation system, which reaches a sub-optimal equilibrium between trial-by-trial learning and forgetting. However, recent research has suggested that allowing longer motor planning periods prior to movement eliminates these residual errors. The additional planning time allows required cognitive processes to be completed before movement onset, thus increasing accuracy. Here we looked to extend these findings by investigating the relationship between increased motor preparation time and the size of imposed visuomotor rotation (30°, 45° or 60°), with regards to the final asymptotic level of adaptation. We found that restricting preparation time to 0.35 seconds impaired adaptation for moderate and larger rotations, resulting in larger residual errors compared to groups with additional preparation time. However, we found that even extended preparation time failed to eliminate persistent errors, regardless of magnitude of cursor rotation. Thus, the asymptote of adaptation was significantly less than the degree of imposed rotation, for all experimental groups. Additionally, there was a positive relationship between asymptotic error and implicit retention. These data suggest that a prolonged motor preparation period is insufficient to reliably achieve complete adaptation and therefore our results provide support for the proposal that the balance between error-based learning and forgetting (i.e., incomplete retention) contributes to asymptotic adaptation levels.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Residual errors in visuomotor adaptation persist despite extended motor preparation periods

Weightman

Brittain

Miall

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As such, this method eliminates the potentially confounding effects of strategic processes (McDougle et al, 2016; Kim et al, 2020). Nonetheless, participants’ reach angles gradually shift in the direction opposite to the clamp and shows the cardinal signatures of implicit motor adaptation without awareness (Morehead et al, 2017; Kim et al, 2018, 2019; Parvin et al, 2018; Tsay et al, 2020a, 2020b, 2021a, 2021b; Avraham et al, 2021; Poh et al, 2021; Vandevoorde and Orban de Xivry, 2019; Yin and Wei, 2020).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Contextual effects in sensorimotor adaptation adhere to associative learning rules

Avraham

Taylor

Breska

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two influential paradigms, sensorimotor adaptation and eyeblink conditioning, have deepened our understanding of the theoretical and neural foundations of motor learning, and in particular, the role of the cerebellum. Although there has been some cross-pollination between these two lines of research, they typically operate within distinct theoretical frameworks, with the incremental updating of an internal forward model explaining adaptation, and associative learning processes explaining eyeblink conditioning. Here we ask if a unified framework might be parsimonious, directly linking sensorimotor adaptation to associative learning. Using a task that isolates implicit sensorimotor adaptation, we paired movement-related feedback with neutral auditory or visual cues that served as conditioning stimuli (CSs) to test two key signatures of associative learning-differential conditioning and compound conditioning. We observed clear Pavlovian effects in both cases: Implicit trial-by-trial changes in movement kinematics were reliably modulated by the CSs in the predicted directions. Moreover, after compound conditioning, we observed a robust negative correlation between the responses of individuals to the two elemental CSs of the compound, consistent with the additivity principle posited by the Rescorla-Wagner model of classical conditioning. Computational modelling demonstrates that these results cannot be captured by the conventional algorithm used to explain the operation of a forward model. We believe that associative learning effects in implicit sensorimotor adaptation provide a proof-of-concept for linking multiple motor learning paradigms within a similar theoretical framework.

show abstract

“…Given that attenuation of implicit adaption in relearning has not been highlighted in the literature, we conducted a replication study using an online platform [32,33], one in which the crowdsourced participants complete the study remotely using their individual display and response devices. The results from the online study were quite similar to those observed in Experiment 2 (S2 Fig, all statistics are reported in the caption).…”

Section: Plos Biologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on power calculations from the aftereffect data in Experiment 2, a minimum sample size of 9 would be required (d = 0.94). However, given the results from pilot work indicating that online data would be more variable and show a lower asymptotic level of adaptation [33], we opted to use a large sample size.…”

Section: Plos Biologymentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The motor system demonstrates an exquisite ability to adapt to changes in the environment and to quickly reset when these changes prove transient. If similar environmental changes are encountered in the future, learning may be faster, a phenomenon known as savings. In studies of sensorimotor learning, a central component of savings is attributed to the explicit recall of the task structure and appropriate compensatory strategies. Whether implicit adaptation also contributes to savings remains subject to debate. We tackled this question by measuring, in parallel, explicit and implicit adaptive responses in a visuomotor rotation task, employing a protocol that typically elicits savings. While the initial rate of learning was faster in the second exposure to the perturbation, an analysis decomposing the 2 processes showed the benefit to be solely associated with explicit re-aiming. Surprisingly, we found a significant decrease after relearning in aftereffect magnitudes during no-feedback trials, a direct measure of implicit adaptation. In a second experiment, we isolated implicit adaptation using clamped visual feedback, a method known to eliminate the contribution of explicit learning processes. Consistent with the results of the first experiment, participants exhibited a marked reduction in the adaptation function, as well as an attenuated aftereffect when relearning from the clamped feedback. Motivated by these results, we reanalyzed data from prior studies and observed a consistent, yet unappreciated pattern of attenuation of implicit adaptation during relearning. These results indicate that explicit and implicit sensorimotor processes exhibit opposite effects upon relearning: Explicit learning shows savings, while implicit adaptation becomes attenuated

show abstract

Moving outside the lab: The viability of conducting sensorimotor learning studies online

Cited by 34 publications

References 103 publications

Residual errors in visuomotor adaptation persist despite extended motor preparation periods

Residual errors in visuomotor adaptation persist despite extended motor preparation periods

Contextual effects in sensorimotor adaptation adhere to associative learning rules

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About