scholarly journals Different contributions of efferent and reafferent feedback to sensorimotor temporal recalibration

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Belkis Ezgi Arikan ◽  
Bianca M. van Kemenade ◽  
Katja Fiehler ◽  
Tilo Kircher ◽  
Knut Drewing ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Button Press ◽  
Dependent Manner ◽  
Component Reliability ◽  
Subsequent Test ◽  
Temporal Recalibration ◽  
Variable Delays ◽  
Environment Adaptation ◽  
Proprioceptive Sensation ◽  
Feedback Modalities

AbstractAdaptation to delays between actions and sensory feedback is important for efficiently interacting with our environment. Adaptation may rely on predictions of action-feedback pairing (motor-sensory component), or predictions of tactile-proprioceptive sensation from the action and sensory feedback of the action (inter-sensory component). Reliability of temporal information might differ across sensory feedback modalities (e.g. auditory or visual), which in turn influences adaptation. Here, we investigated the role of motor-sensory and inter-sensory components on sensorimotor temporal recalibration for motor-auditory (button press-tone) and motor-visual (button press-Gabor patch) events. In the adaptation phase of the experiment, action-feedback pairs were presented with systematic temporal delays (0 ms or 150 ms). In the subsequent test phase, audio/visual feedback of the action were presented with variable delays. The participants were then asked whether they detected a delay. To disentangle motor-sensory from inter-sensory component, we varied movements (active button press or passive depression of button) at adaptation and test. Our results suggest that motor-auditory recalibration is mainly driven by the motor-sensory component, whereas motor-visual recalibration is mainly driven by the inter-sensory component. Recalibration transferred from vision to audition, but not from audition to vision. These results indicate that motor-sensory and inter-sensory components contribute to recalibration in a modality-dependent manner.

scholarly journals Sensorimotor temporal recalibration: the contribution of motor-sensory and inter-sensory components

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Belkis Ezgi Arikan ◽  
Bianca M. van Kemenade ◽  
Katja Fiehler ◽  
Tilo Kircher ◽  
Knut Drewing ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Button Press ◽  
Dependent Manner ◽  
Component Reliability ◽  
Subsequent Test ◽  
Temporal Recalibration ◽  
Variable Delays ◽  
Environment Adaptation ◽  
Proprioceptive Sensation ◽  
Feedback Modalities

AbstractAdaptation to delays between actions and sensory feedback is important for efficiently interacting with our environment. Adaptation may rely on predictions of action-feedback pairing (motor-sensory component), or predictions of tactile-proprioceptive sensation from the action and sensory feedback of the action (inter-sensory component). Reliability of temporal information might differ across sensory feedback modalities (e.g. auditory or visual), influencing adaptation. Here, we investigated the role of motor-sensory and inter-sensory components on sensorimotor temporal recalibration for motor-auditory events (button press-tone) and motor-visual events (button press-Gabor patch). In the adaptation phase of the experiment, the motor action-feedback event pairs were presented with systematic temporal delays (0ms or 150ms). In the subsequent test phase, sensory feedback of the action were presented with variable delays. The participants were then asked whether this delay could be detected. To disentangle motor-sensory from inter-sensory component, we varied movements (active button press or passive depression of button) at adaptation and test. Our results suggest that motor-auditory recalibration is mainly driven by motor-sensory component, whereas motor-visual recalibration is mainly driven by inter-sensory component. Recalibration transferred from vision to audition, but not from audition to vision. These results indicate that motor-sensory and inter-sensory components of recalibration are weighted in a modality-dependent manner.

Delayed Sensory Feedback in Visual and Auditory Tracking

1967 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Wargo
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Visual Tracking ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Motion Patterns ◽  
Visual Pursuit ◽  
Transmission Delays ◽  
Control Delay ◽  
Pursuit Tracking ◽  
Male College ◽  
Feedback Modalities

Visual compensatory, visual pursuit, auditory compensatory, and auditory pursuit tracking of 20 male college students was observed under the conditions of .000-, .210-, .420-, and .840-sec. transmission type control delay. Tracking efficiency decreased as transmission delays increased; visual tracking was consistently superior to auditory tracking, although the relative degradation across delays was greater for visual than for auditory tracking; and little if any adaptation to the delays was apparent. These results point out the essentially similar effects of delayed sensory feedback on equivalent motion patterns when guided by different feedback modalities.

scholarly journals Rapid feedback corrections during a bimanual postural task

2013 ◽  
Vol 109 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohsen Omrani ◽  
Jörn Diedrichsen ◽  
Stephen H. Scott
Keyword(s):  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Spatial Average ◽  
Electromyographic Activity ◽  
Dependent Manner ◽  
Left Hand ◽  
Motor Physiology ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right ◽  
Online Feedback

An important observation in motor physiology is that even the fastest feedback responses can be modified in a task-dependent manner. However, whether or not such responses in one limb can be modulated based on online sensory feedback from other limbs is still unknown. We tested this using a bimanual postural control task, in which the two hands either controlled two separate cursors (double-cursor task) or a single cursor displayed at the spatial average between the hands (single-cursor task). In the first experiment, the two hands were symmetrically perturbed outwards. In the double-cursor task, the participants therefore had to return their hands to the targets, whereas in the single-cursor task no correction was necessary. Within 50 ms, the electromyographic activity showed significantly smaller responses in the single- compared with the double-cursor task. In the second experiment, the perturbation direction of the left hand (inward/outward) was randomized, such that participants could not preplan their response before perturbation onset. Results show that the behavior of the right arm in the one-cursor task depended on online feedback coming from the left arm: the muscular response was modulated within 75 ms based on directionally specific information of the left arm. These results suggest that sensory feedback from one limb can quickly modify the perturbation response of another limb in a task-dependent manner.

Interaction between Auditory and Oral Sensory Feedback in Speech Regulation

1977 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Fucci ◽  
Michael A. Crary ◽  
Joseph A. Warren ◽  
Z. S. Bond
Keyword(s):  
Speech Production ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Temporal Changes ◽  
Speech Sounds ◽  
Auditory Masking ◽  
Vibrotactile Thresholds ◽  
Oral Sensory ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Feedback Modalities

To investigate the interaction between the auditory and oral sensory feedback modalities during speech production lingual vibrotactile thresholds were obtained from subjects in the following conditions: (1) before and after speech production with normal auditory feedback, (2) before and after speech production under exposure to auditory masking, and (3) before and after exposure to auditory masking without performing speech tasks. In addition duration measurements were obtained for selected speech sounds to investigate temporal changes in the articulatory patterns of subjects in the various conditions. Lingual sensory decreases and temporal reorganization were observed only in subjects speaking under auditory masking. These data suggest a balanced interaction between auditory and oral sensory feedback modalities which, when disturbed, results in non-phonemic change in speech production.

scholarly journals Appetitive Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer in Participants with Normal-Weight and Obesity

Nutrients ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 1037 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Theres Meemken ◽  
Annette Horstmann
Keyword(s):  
Normal Weight ◽  
Test Phase ◽  
Button Press ◽  
Weight Group ◽  
Subsequent Test ◽  
Main Effect ◽  
Important Player ◽  
Fractal Images ◽  
Three Factor Eating Questionnaire ◽  
Enriched Environments

Altered eating behavior due to modern, food-enriched environments has a share in the recent obesity upsurge, though the exact mechanisms remain unclear. This study aims to assess whether higher weight or weight gain are related to stronger effects of external cues on motivation-driven behavior. 51 people with and without obesity completed an appetitive Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer (PIT) paradigm. During training, button presses as well as presentation of fractal images resulted in three palatable and one neutral taste outcome. In the subsequent test phase, outcome-specific and general behavioral bias of the positively associated fractal images on deliberate button press were tested under extinction. While all participants showed signs of specific transfer, general transfer was not elicited. Contrary to our expectations, there was no main effect of weight group on PIT magnitude. Participants with obesity exhibited higher scores in the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire Disinhibition scale, replicating a very robust effect from previous literature. Individual Restraint scores were able to predict body-mass index (BMI) change after a three-year period. Our data indicate that PIT is an important player in how our environment influences the initiation of food intake, but its effects alone cannot explain differences in—or future development of—individual weight.

scholarly journals Polydextrose results in a dose-dependent reduction in ad libitum energy intake at a subsequent test meal

2013 ◽  
Vol 110 (5) ◽  
pp. 934-942 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nerys M. Astbury ◽  
Moira A. Taylor ◽  
Ian A. Macdonald
Keyword(s):  
Energy Intake ◽  
Test Meal ◽  
Optimal Dose ◽  
Reduce Food Intake ◽  
Dependent Manner ◽  
Food Diary ◽  
Subsequent Test ◽  
Ad Libitum ◽  
Dose Dependent ◽  
Analogue Scales

Previous studies have reported that polydextrose can reduce food intake; however, the optimal dose required to achieve this effect is currently unknown. The present study investigated the effects of consuming a range of doses of polydextrose on appetite and energy intake (EI) using a randomised within-subject, cross-over design. For this purpose, twenty-one participants (n 12 men, n 9 women) consumed an 837 kJ liquid preload containing 0 g (control), 6·3, 12·5 or 25 g polydextrose. Subjective appetite ratings were collected using visual analogue scales and an ad libitum test meal was served 90 min later. Participants recorded EI for the remainder of the day in a food diary. Test meal EI following the control preload (5756 (sem 423) kJ) was significantly higher than following the 6·3 g (5048 (sem 384) kJ), 12·5 g (4722 (sem 384) kJ) and 25 g (4362 (sem 316) kJ) preloads (P< 0·05), and EI following the 6·3 g preload was significantly higher than following the 25 g preload (P< 0·01). There were no differences in self-reported EI during the remainder of the day between the preloads containing the varying doses of polydextrose. Total EI (breakfast+preload+ad libitum test meal+remainder of the day) was significantly higher when the control preload was consumed (12 051 (sem 805) kJ) compared with either the 12·5 g (10 854 (sem 589) kJ) or 25 g (10 658 (sem 506) kJ) preload (P< 0·05). These differences in EI were not accompanied by corresponding differences in subjective appetite ratings. In summary, polydextrose effectively reduces subsequent EI in a dose-dependent manner.

scholarly journals The sensory representation of causally controlled objects

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly B. Clancy ◽  
Thomas D. Mrsic-Flogel
Keyword(s):  
Visual Cortex ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Target Location ◽  
Activity Patterns ◽  
Wide Field ◽  
Dependent Manner ◽  
Intentional Control ◽  
External Objects ◽  
Machine Interface ◽  
Cortical Regions

SummaryIntentional control over external objects is informed by our sensory experience of them. To study how causal relationships are learned and effected, we devised a brain machine interface (BMI) task utilising wide-field calcium signals. Mice learned to entrain activity patterns in arbitrary pairs of cortical regions to guide a visual cursor to a target location for reward. Brain areas that were normally correlated could be rapidly reconfigured to exert control over the cursor in a sensory feedback-dependent manner. Higher visual cortex was more engaged when expert but not naïve animals controlled the cursor. Individual neurons in higher visual cortex responded more strongly to the cursor when mice controlled it than when they passively viewed it, with the greatest response boosting as the cursor approached target location. Thus, representations of causally-controlled objects are sensitive to intention and proximity to the subject’s goal, potentially strengthening sensory feedback to allow more fluent control.

scholarly journals Act Now, Play Later: Temporal Expectations Regarding the Onset of Self-initiated Sensations Can Be Modified with Behavioral Training

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (8) ◽  
pp. 1145-1156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth B. Elijah ◽  
Mike E. Le Pelley ◽  
Thomas J. Whitford
Keyword(s):  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Psychotic Symptoms ◽  
Button Press ◽  
Stimulus Repetition ◽  
Immediate Feedback ◽  
Msec Delay ◽  
Sensory Prediction ◽  
Default Assumption ◽  
Therapeutic Avenue ◽  
Cortical Change

Mechanisms of motor-sensory prediction are dependent on expectations regarding when self-generated feedback will occur. Existing behavioral and electrophysiological research suggests that we have a default expectation for immediate sensory feedback after executing an action. However, studies investigating the adaptability of this temporal expectation have been limited in their ability to differentiate modified expectations per se from effects of stimulus repetition. Here, we use a novel, within-participant procedure that allowed us to disentangle the effect of repetition from expectation and allowed us to determine whether the default assumption for immediate feedback is fixed and resistant to modification or is amenable to change with experience. While EEG was recorded, 45 participants completed a task in which they repeatedly pressed a button to produce a tone that occurred immediately after the button press (immediate training) or after a 100-msec delay (delayed training). The results revealed significant differences in the patterns of cortical change across the two training conditions. Specifically, there was a significant reduction in the cortical response to tones across delayed training blocks but no significant change across immediate training blocks. Furthermore, experience with delayed training did not result in increased cortical activity in response to immediate feedback. These findings suggest that experience with action–sensation delays broadens the window of temporal expectations, allowing for the simultaneous anticipation of both delayed and immediate motor-sensory feedback. This research provides insights into the mechanisms underlying motor-sensory prediction and may represent a novel therapeutic avenue for psychotic symptoms, which are ostensibly associated with sensory prediction abnormalities.

scholarly journals Audiomotor Temporal Recalibration Modulates Decision Criterion of Self-Agency but Not Perceptual Sensitivity

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshimori Sugano
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Research ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Signal Detection Theory ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Decision Criterion ◽  
Voluntary Action ◽  
Short Sequence ◽  
Perceptual Sensitivity ◽  
Temporal Recalibration ◽  
Computer Mouse

Exposure to delayed sensory feedback changes perceived simultaneity between action and feedback [temporal recalibration (TR)] and even modulates the sense of agency (SoA) over the feedback. To date, however, it is not clear whether the modulation of SoA by TR is caused by a change in perceptual sensitivity or decision criterion of self-agency. This experimental research aimed to tease apart these two by applying the signal detection theory (SDT) to the agency judgment over auditory feedback after voluntary action. Participants heard a short sequence of tone pips with equal inter-onset intervals, and they reproduced it by pressing a computer mouse. The delay of each tone pip after the mouse press was manipulated as 80 (baseline) or 180 ms (delayed). Subsequently, the participants reproduced it, in which the delay was fixed at 80 ms and there was a 50% chance that the computer took over the control of the tone pips from the participants. The participants’ task was to discriminate who controlled the tone pips and to judge synchrony between tone pips and mouse presses. Results showed that the modulation of the SoA by the TR is caused by a shift in the decision criterion but not in the perceptual sensitivity of agency.

scholarly journals Responses to Auditory Feedback Manipulations in Speech May Be Affected by Previous Exposure to Auditory Errors

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Caroline A. Niziolek ◽  
Benjamin Parrell
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Exposure Phase ◽  
Compensatory Response ◽  
Initial Exposure ◽  
Subsequent Test ◽  
Speech Output ◽  
Feedback Compensation ◽  
Monosyllabic Words ◽  
Post Hoc

Purpose Speakers use auditory feedback to guide their speech output, although individuals differ in the magnitude of their compensatory response to perceived errors in feedback. Little is known about the factors that contribute to the compensatory response or how fixed or flexible they are within an individual. Here, we test whether manipulating the perceived reliability of auditory feedback modulates speakers' compensation to auditory perturbations, as predicted by optimal models of sensorimotor control. Method Forty participants produced monosyllabic words in two separate sessions, which differed in the auditory feedback given during an initial exposure phase. In the veridical session exposure phase, feedback was normal. In the noisy session exposure phase, small, random formant perturbations were applied, reducing reliability of auditory feedback. In each session, a subsequent test phase introduced larger unpredictable formant perturbations. We assessed whether the magnitude of within-trial compensation for these larger perturbations differed across the two sessions. Results Compensatory responses to downward (though not upward) formant perturbations were larger in the veridical session than the noisy session. However, in post hoc testing, we found the magnitude of this effect is highly dependent on the choice of analysis procedures. Compensation magnitude was not predicted by other production measures, such as formant variability, and was not reliably correlated across sessions. Conclusions Our results, though mixed, provide tentative support that the feedback control system monitors the reliability of sensory feedback. These results must be interpreted cautiously given the potentially limited stability of auditory feedback compensation measures across analysis choices and across sessions. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.14167136

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document