Of hands, tools, and exploding dots: How different action states and effects separate visuomotor memories

Abstract

Humans can operate a variety of modern tools, which are often associated with different visuomotor transformations. Studies investigating this ability have repeatedly found that the simultaneous acquisition of different transformations appears inextricably tied to distinct states associated with movement, such as different postures or action plans, whereas abstract contextual associations can be leveraged by explicit aiming strategies. It still remains unclear how different transformations are remembered implicitly when target postures are similar.We investigated if features of planning to manipulate a visual tool, such as its visual identity or the intended effect enable implicit learning of opposing visuomotor rotations. Both cues only affected implicit aftereffects indirectly through generalization around explicit strategies.In contrast, practicing transformations with different hands resulted in separate aftereffects.It appears that different (intended) body states are necessary to separate aftereffects, supporting the idea that underlying implicit adaptation is limited to the recalibration of a body model.

Movement-goal relevant object shape properties act as poor but viable cues for the attribution of motor errors to external objects

“…We did not find conclusive evidence to suggest either subprocess of adaptation drove the overall learning effects. Studies exploring dual adaptation in conventional upper-limb motor learning tasks suggest a strong contribution of explicit processes [8,42]. Although patterns of adaptation are similar in immersive virtual environments [39,[43][44][45], the effects of interactions within a new environments on the subprocesses of motor learning are not yet well explored.…”