scholarly journals Symmetric Intralimb Transfer of Skilled Isometric Force Production

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vikram A Rajan ◽  
Robert M Hardwick ◽  
Pablo A Celnik

Motor control theories propose that the same motor plans can be employed by different effectors. Skills learned with one effector can therefore 'transfer' to others, which has potential applications in clinical situations. However, evidence from visuomotor adaptation suggests this effect is asymmetric; learning can be generalized from proximal-to-distal effectors (e.g. arm to hand), but not from distal-to-proximal effectors (e.g. hand to arm). We propose that skill learning may not be subject to this asymmetry, as it relies on multiple learning processes beyond error detection and correction. Participants learned a skill task involving the production of isometric forces. We assessed their ability to perform the task with the hand and arm. One group trained to perform the task using only their hand, while a second trained using only their arm. In a final assessment, we found that participants who trained with either effector improved their skill in performing the task with both their hand and arm. There was no change in a control group that did not train between assessments, indicating that gains were related to the training, not the multiple assessments. These results indicate that in contrast to visuomotor adaptation, motor skills can generalize from both proximal-to-distal and distal-to-proximal effectors. We propose this is due to differences in the processes underlying skill acquisition in comparison to visuomotor adaptation.

2019 ◽  
Vol 122 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vikram A. Rajan ◽  
Robert M. Hardwick ◽  
Pablo A. Celnik

Motor control theories propose that the same motor plans can be employed by different effectors (e.g., the hand and arm). Skills learned with one effector can therefore “transfer” to others, which has potential applications in clinical situations. However, evidence from adaptation suggests this effect is not reciprocal; learning can be generalized from proximal to distal effectors (e.g., arm to hand), but not from distal to proximal effectors (e.g., hand to arm). We propose that skill learning may not follow the same pattern, because it relies on multiple learning processes beyond error detection and correction. Participants learned a skill task involving the production of isometric forces. We assessed their ability to perform the task with the hand and arm. One group then trained to perform the task using only their hand, whereas a second group trained using only their arm. In a final assessment, we found that participants who trained with either effector improved their skill in performing the task with both their hand and arm. There was no change in a control group that did not train between assessments, indicating that gains were related to the training, not the multiple assessments. These results indicate that in contrast to adaptation, motor skills can generalize from both proximal to distal effectors and from distal to proximal effectors. We propose this is due to differences in the processes underlying skill acquisition as compared with adaptation. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Prior research indicates that motor learning transfers from proximal to distal effectors, but not vice versa. However, this work focused on adapting existing behavior; we questioned whether different results would occur during learning of new motor skills. We found that the benefits of training on a skill task with either the hand or arm transferred across both effectors. This highlights important differences between adaptation and skill learning, and may allow therapeutic benefits for patients with impairments in specific effectors.


2009 ◽  
Vol 102 (3) ◽  
pp. 1868-1879 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joaquin A. Anguera ◽  
Rachael D. Seidler ◽  
William J. Gehring

Error detection and correction are essential components of motor skill learning. These processes have been well characterized in cognitive psychology using electroencephalography (EEG) to record an event-related potential (ERP) called error-related negativity (ERN). However, it is unclear whether this ERP component is sensitive to the magnitude of the error made in a sensorimotor adaptation task. In the present study, we tested the function of error-related activity in a visuomotor adaptation task. To examine whether error size is reflected in the ERP, two groups of participants adapted manual aiming movements to either a small (30°) or large (45°) rotation of the visual feedback display. Each participant's trials were sorted into large and small error trials using a median split to examine potential error magnitude waveform differences. We also examined these trial types at the early and late stages of adaptation. There were no group differences for the behavioral or neural measures; however, waveforms from large error trials were significantly different from small error trials. The waveforms also changed as a function of practice as early adaptation waveforms were larger than late adaptation waveforms. The observed ERP component reflected differences in error magnitude with the amount of activity corresponding to the size of the error. Movement monitoring potentials likely affected the frequency and time course of the waveform so that it did not resemble the typical ERN; however, error-related activity was still distinguishable. The present findings are discussed in terms of current theories of the ERN as well as skill acquisition.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raphael Schween ◽  
Samuel D. McDougle ◽  
Mathias Hegele ◽  
Jordan A. Taylor

AbstractIn recent years, it has become increasingly clear that a number of learning processes are at play in visuomotor adaptation tasks. In addition to the presumed formation of an internal model of the perturbation, learners can also develop explicit knowledge allowing them to select better actions in responding to a given perturbation. Advances in visuomotor rotation experiments have underscored the important role that such “explicit learning” plays in shaping adaptation to kinematic perturbations. Yet, in adaptation to dynamic perturbations, its contribution has been largely overlooked, potentially because compensation of a viscous force field, for instance, is difficult to assess by commonly-used verbalization-based approaches. We therefore sought to assess the contribution of explicit learning in learners adapting to a dynamic perturbation by two novel modifications of a force field experiment. First, via an elimination approach, we asked learners to abandon any cognitive strategy before selected force channel trials to expose consciously accessible parts of overall learning. Learners indeed reduced compensatory force compared to standard Catch channels. Second, via a manual reporting approach, we instructed a group of learners to mimic their right hand’s adaptation by moving with their naïve left hand. While a control group displayed negligible left-hand force compensation, the Mimic group reported forces that approximated right-hand adaptation but appeared to under-report the velocity component of the force field in favor of a more position-based component. We take these results to clearly demonstrate the contribution of explicit learning to force adaptation, underscoring its relevance to motor learning in general.New & NoteworthyWhile the role of explicit learning has recently been appreciated in visuomotor adaptation tasks, their contribution to force field adaptation has not been as widely acknowledged. To address this issue, we employed two novel methods to assay explicit learning in force field adaptation tasks and found that learners can voluntarily control aspects of force production and manually report them with their untrained limb. This suggests that an explicit component contributes to force field adaptation and may provide alternative explanations to behavioral phenomena commonly thought to reveal a complex organization of internal models in the brain.


2004 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 306-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niilo Konttinen ◽  
Kaisu Mononen ◽  
Jukka Viitasalo ◽  
Toni Mets

This study examined the effectiveness of augmented auditory feedback on the performance and learning of a precision shooting task. Participants included Finnish conscripts (N = 30) who were randomly assigned to one of three groups: auditory feedback group (AFb), knowledge-of-results group (KR), and nontraining control group (Control). Data collection consisted of a pretest, a 4-week acquisition phase, a posttest, and two tests of retention. The effectiveness of the treatment was evaluated in terms of performance outcome, i.e., shooting result. Concurrent auditory feedback related to rife stability did not facilitate shooting performance in a practice situation. In the posttest and retention tests, the participants in the AFb group displayed more accurate shooting performance than those in the KR and Control groups. Findings suggest that a non-elite shooter’s performance can be improved with a 4-week auditory feedback treatment. Given that the learning advantage persisted for delayed retention tests, the observed improvement in skill acquisition was due to relatively permanent variables rather than to temporary effects.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Célia Ruffino ◽  
Charlène Truong ◽  
William Dupont ◽  
Fatma Bouguila ◽  
Carine Michel ◽  
...  

AbstractIt well-known that mental training improves skill performance. Here, we evaluated skill acquisition and consolidation after physical or motor imagery practice, by means of an arm pointing task requiring speed-accuracy trade-off. In the main experiment, we showed a significant enhancement of skill after both practices (72 training trials), with a better acquisition after physical practice. Interestingly, we found a positive impact of the passage of time (+ 6 h post training) on skill consolidation for the motor imagery training only, without any effect of sleep (+ 24 h post training) for none of the interventions. In a control experiment, we matched the gain in skill learning after physical training (new group) with that obtained after motor imagery training (main experiment) to evaluate skill consolidation after the same amount of learning. Skill performance in this control group deteriorated with the passage of time and sleep. In another control experiment, we increased the number of imagined trials (n = 100, new group) to compare the acquisition and consolidation processes of this group with that observed in the motor imagery group of the main experiment. We did not find significant differences between the two groups. These findings suggest that physical and motor imagery practice drive skill learning through different acquisition and consolidation processes.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva L. Dyer ◽  
Mohammad Gheshlaghi Azar ◽  
Hugo L. Fernandes ◽  
Matthew G. Perich ◽  
Stephanie Naufel ◽  
...  

Brain decoders use neural recordings to infer a user’s activity or intent. To train a decoder, we generally need infer the variables of interest (covariates) using simultaneously measured neural activity. However, there are many cases where this approach is not possible. Here we overcome this problem by introducing a fundamentally new approach for decoding called distribution alignment decoding (DAD). We use the statistics of movement, much like cryptographers use the statistics of language, to find a mapping between neural activity and motor variables. DAD learns a linear decoder which aligns the distribution of its output with the typical distribution of motor outputs by minimizing their KL-divergence. We apply our approach to a two datasets collected from the motor cortex of non-human primates (NHPs): a reaching task and an isometric force production task. We study the performance of DAD and find regimes where DAD provides comparable and in some cases, better performance than a typical supervised decoder. As DAD does not rely on the ability to record motor-related outputs, it promises to broaden the set of potential applications of brain decoding.


2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle V. Thompson ◽  
Janet L. Utschig ◽  
Mikaela K. Vaughan ◽  
Marc V. Richard ◽  
Benjamin A. Clegg

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document