The Effects of Visual and Proprioceptive Feedback on Motor Learning

1975 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack A. Adams ◽  
Daniel Gopher ◽  
Gavan Lintern
Keyword(s):  
Motor Learning ◽  
Visual Feedback ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Closed Loop ◽  
Motor Program ◽  
Absolute Error ◽  
Proprioceptive Feedback ◽  
Knowledge Of Results ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Effective Source

A self paced linear positioning task was used to study the effects of visual and proprioceptive feedback on learning and performance. Subjects were trained with knowledge of results (KR) and tested without it. The analysis of the absolute error scores of the no-KR trials is discussed in this paper. Visual feedback was the more effective source of sensory feedback, but proprioceptive feedback was also effective. An observation that the response did not become independent of sensory feedback as a result of learning, was interpreted as supporting Adams closed loop theory of motor learning in preference to the motor program hypothesis. Other data showed that the presence of visual feedback during learning could inhibit the later effectiveness of proprioceptive feedback.

scholarly journals Sex Differences in Maintaining the Requested Handgrip Force Enhanced by Auditory or Visual Feedback

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (14) ◽  
pp. 5158
Author(s):  
Jacek Tarnas ◽  
Rafał Stemplewski ◽  
Piotr Krutki
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Motor Learning ◽  
Visual Feedback ◽  
Motor Task ◽  
Motor Tasks ◽  
Auditory Displays ◽  
Main Effect ◽  
Simple Motor Task ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Mixed Groups

Thus far, the differences in effect of auditory or visual feedback in motor learning have presented results derived from mixed groups and sex differences have not been considered. However, perception and processing of auditory stimuli and performance of visual motor tasks appear to be sex-related. The purpose of this study was to investigate the learning of the simple motor task of maintaining a requested handgrip force in separate male and female groups. A total of 31 volunteers (15 males, 16 females) were randomly assigned to one of four experimental groups with defined sex and training conditions (audio or visual feedback). Participants performed training sessions over a period of six days, for which auditory or visual feedback was provided, and the effectiveness of both types of signals was compared. The evident learning effect was found in all groups, and the main effect of sex was significant among visual groups in favor of the males (p < 0.05). On the other hand, the main effect of feedback conditions was found to be significant among females, beneficially in the case of auditory displays (p < 0.05). The results lead to the conclusion that an equal number of males and females in mixed experimental groups may be supportive to obtain reliable results. Moreover, in motor-learning studies conducted on females only, a design including auditory feedback would be more suitable.

Reward feedback accelerates motor learning

2015 ◽  
Vol 113 (2) ◽  
pp. 633-646 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali A. Nikooyan ◽  
Alaa A. Ahmed
Keyword(s):  
Motor Learning ◽  
Visual Feedback ◽  
Learning Process ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Visuomotor Learning ◽  
Visuomotor Rotation ◽  
Rotational Perturbation ◽  
Drive Motor ◽  
Underlying Mechanisms ◽  
Broad Generalization

Recent findings have demonstrated that reward feedback alone can drive motor learning. However, it is not yet clear whether reward feedback alone can lead to learning when a perturbation is introduced abruptly, or how a reward gradient can modulate learning. In this study, we provide reward feedback that decays continuously with increasing error. We asked whether it is possible to learn an abrupt visuomotor rotation by reward alone, and if the learning process could be modulated by combining reward and sensory feedback and/or by using different reward landscapes. We designed a novel visuomotor learning protocol during which subjects experienced an abruptly introduced rotational perturbation. Subjects received either visual feedback or reward feedback, or a combination of the two. Two different reward landscapes, where the reward decayed either linearly or cubically with distance from the target, were tested. Results demonstrate that it is possible to learn from reward feedback alone and that the combination of reward and sensory feedback accelerates learning. An analysis of the underlying mechanisms reveals that although reward feedback alone does not allow for sensorimotor remapping, it can nonetheless lead to broad generalization, highlighting a dissociation between remapping and generalization. Also, the combination of reward and sensory feedback accelerates learning without compromising sensorimotor remapping. These findings suggest that the use of reward feedback is a promising approach to either supplement or substitute sensory feedback in the development of improved neurorehabilitation techniques. More generally, they point to an important role played by reward in the motor learning process.

Effects of Field-Articulation and Feedback on Perception of Intermediate Visual-Kinesthetic Position

1975 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 875-878 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Roger Ware ◽  
Richard C. Barnhill
Keyword(s):  
Visual Feedback ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
High Field ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Constant Error ◽  
Mean Absolute Error ◽  
Absolute Error ◽  
Low Field ◽  
Kinesthetic Feedback ◽  
The Mean

High and low field-articulators were compared on the accuracy with which they could adjust a rod to intermediate visual-kinesthetic positions while blindfolded, under four sensory-feedback conditions. Independent groups of 10 Ss were given auditory, visual, kinesthetic, or no sensory feedback for 16 trials and then tested on 8 trials without sensory feedback. High field-articulators were significantly more accurate on the feedback trials for all sensory-feedback conditions but not in terms of mean absolute error. The mean constant error on the test trials was significantly lower for the high field-articulators on all feedback conditions except for visual feedback where the low field-articulator had a lower constant error. Both the high and low field-articulators became more accurate and learned more in judging visual-kinesthetic position when auditory feedback was given. Low field-articulators showed significant improvement in accuracy with kinesthetic feedback. The results supported the hypothesis that intermediate directions can be learned and supported previous perceptual research.

scholarly journals 4091 Influence of Vision and Proprioception on Motor Control in ASD

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (s1) ◽  
pp. 97-97
Author(s):  
Robin L Shafer ◽  
Zheng Wang ◽  
Matthew W. Mosconi
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Visual Feedback ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Proprioceptive Feedback ◽  
Tendon Vibration ◽  
Force Output ◽  
Preliminary Results ◽  
Visual Gain ◽  
Target Force

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Sensorimotor integration deficits are common in Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). There is evidence for both an over-reliance on visual and proprioceptive feedback during motor control in ASD, suggesting deficits in the ability to modulate sensory feedback processing in order to use the most reliable input. This study aims to test this hypothesis. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: 40 persons with ASD (ages 10-33 yrs) and 25 age-, sex- and nonverbal IQ-matched controls completed precision gripping tasks under multiple proprioceptive and visual feedback conditions. Participants squeezed a force sensor with their index finger and thumb and tried to match their force output to a target force. Visual feedback of the target force (stationary bar) and their force output (bar that moved up/down with increased/decreased force) were displayed on a computer screen. Visual feedback was presented across low, medium, and high gain levels; the force bar moved a greater distance per change in force at higher gains. Proprioceptive feedback was manipulated using 80Hz tendon vibration at the wrist to create an illusion that the muscle is contracted. Force regularity (approximate entropy; ApEn) was examined. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We have scored data from 18 participants with ASD and 13 control participants to date. Preliminary results from these participants indicate a Group x Tendon Vibration x Visual Gain interaction for ApEn (F = 1.559, p = 0.023). Individuals with ASD show slight increases in ApEn with 80Hz tendon vibration relative to no tendon vibration in all visual conditions. Controls showed increased ApEn during 80Hz compared to no tendon vibration at low visual gain but decreased ApEn with tendon vibration at high visual gain. These preliminary results indicate that controls shift to using a secondary source of sensory feedback (e.g., proprioception) when the primary source (e.g., vision) is degraded. However, persons with ASD do not reweight different sensory feedback processes as feedback inputs are degraded or magnified. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Our preliminary results reveal that sensorimotor issues in ASD result from deficits in the reweighting of sensory feedback. Namely, persons with ASD fail to dynamically recalibrate feedback processes across visual and proprioceptive systems when feedback conditions change. Our results may aid treatment development for sensorimotor issues in ASD.

Human Cerebral Potentials During Motor Training Under Different Forms of Sensory Feedback

1999 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 234-244
Author(s):  
Uwe Niederberger ◽  
Wolf-Dieter Gerber
Keyword(s):  
Healthy Subjects ◽  
Sensory Feedback ◽  
Motor Task ◽  
Tactile Feedback ◽  
Proprioceptive Feedback ◽  
Motor Training ◽  
Feedback Group ◽  
Emg Feedback ◽  
The Right ◽  
Training Success

Abstract In two experiments with four and two groups of healthy subjects, a novel motor task, the voluntary abduction of the right big toe, was trained. This task cannot usually be performed without training and is therefore ideal for the study of elementary motor learning. A systematic variation of proprioceptive, tactile, visual, and EMG feedback was used. In addition to peripheral measurements such as the voluntary range of motion and EMG output during training, a three-channel EEG was recorded over Cz, C3, and C4. The movement-related brain potential during distinct periods of the training was analyzed as a central nervous parameter of the ongoing learning process. In experiment I, we randomized four groups of 12 subjects each (group P: proprioceptive feedback; group PT: proprioceptive and tactile feedback; group PTV: proprioceptive, tactile, and visual feedback; group PTEMG: proprioceptive, tactile, and EMG feedback). Best training results were reported from the PTEMG and PTV groups. The movement-preceding cortical activity, in the form of the amplitude of the readiness potential at the time of EMG onset, was greatest in these two groups. Results of experiment II revealed a similar effect, with a greater training success and a higher electrocortical activation under additional EMG feedback compared to proprioceptive feedback alone. Sensory EMG feedback as evaluated by peripheral and central nervous measurements appears to be useful in motor training and neuromuscular re-education.

The Impact of Visual Feedback Type on the Mastery of Visuo-Motor Transformations

2012 ◽  
Vol 220 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Sülzenbrück
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Research ◽  
Visual Feedback ◽  
Closed Loop ◽  
Motor Planning ◽  
Visual Input ◽  
Closed Loop Control ◽  
Loop Control ◽  
Feedback Type ◽  
Effective Use ◽  
The Impact

For the effective use of modern tools, the inherent visuo-motor transformation needs to be mastered. The successful adjustment to and learning of these transformations crucially depends on practice conditions, particularly on the type of visual feedback during practice. Here, a review about empirical research exploring the influence of continuous and terminal visual feedback during practice on the mastery of visuo-motor transformations is provided. Two studies investigating the impact of the type of visual feedback on either direction-dependent visuo-motor gains or the complex visuo-motor transformation of a virtual two-sided lever are presented in more detail. The findings of these studies indicate that the continuous availability of visual feedback supports performance when closed-loop control is possible, but impairs performance when visual input is no longer available. Different approaches to explain these performance differences due to the type of visual feedback during practice are considered. For example, these differences could reflect a process of re-optimization of motor planning in a novel environment or represent effects of the specificity of practice. Furthermore, differences in the allocation of attention during movements with terminal and continuous visual feedback could account for the observed differences.

Safety and Performance of the Omnipod®Hybrid Closed-Loop System in Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes over Five Days Under Free-Living Conditions

Diabetes ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1376-P
Author(s):  
GREGORY P. FORLENZA ◽  
BRUCE BUCKINGHAM ◽  
JENNIFER SHERR ◽  
THOMAS A. PEYSER ◽  
JOON BOK LEE ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Closed Loop ◽  
Living Conditions ◽  
Loop System ◽  
Closed Loop System ◽  
Free Living ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Free Living Conditions

Safety and Performance of the Omnipod® Hybrid Closed-Loop System in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes over Five Days Under Free-Living Conditions

Diabetes ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 207-OR
Author(s):  
BRUCE A. BUCKINGHAM ◽  
JENNIFER SHERR ◽  
GREGORY P. FORLENZA ◽  
THOMAS A. PEYSER ◽  
JOON BOK LEE ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Closed Loop ◽  
Living Conditions ◽  
Loop System ◽  
Closed Loop System ◽  
Free Living ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Free Living Conditions

Feedback Modalities in Brain–Computer Interfaces: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 1186-1190
Author(s):  
Wakana Ishihara ◽  
Karen Moxon ◽  
Sheryl Ehrman ◽  
Mark Yarborough ◽  
Tina L. Panontin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Visual Feedback ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Brain Computer Interface ◽  
Tactile Feedback ◽  
Proprioceptive Feedback ◽  
Computer Interface ◽  
Computer Interfaces ◽  
Feedback Modalities ◽  
Improving Accuracy

This systematic review addresses the plausibility of using novel feedback modalities for brain–computer interface (BCI) and attempts to identify the best feedback modality on the basis of the effectiveness or learning rate. Out of the chosen studies, it was found that 100% of studies tested visual feedback, 31.6% tested auditory feedback, 57.9% tested tactile feedback, and 21.1% tested proprioceptive feedback. Visual feedback was included in every study design because it was intrinsic to the response of the task (e.g. seeing a cursor move). However, when used alone, it was not very effective at improving accuracy or learning. Proprioceptive feedback was most successful at increasing the effectiveness of motor imagery BCI tasks involving neuroprosthetics. The use of auditory and tactile feedback resulted in mixed results. The limitations of this current study and further study recommendations are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document