Search

We recently showed that subjects can learn motion state-dependent changes to motor output (temporal force patterns) based on explicit visual feedback of the equivalent force field (i.e., without the physical perturbation). Here, we examined the spatiotemporal properties of this learning compared with learning based on physical perturbations. There were two human subject groups and two experimental paradigms. One group (n = 40) experienced physical perturbations (i.e., a velocity-dependent force field, vFF), whereas the second (n = 40) was given explicit visual feedback (EVF) of the force-velocity relationship. In the latter, subjects moved in force channels and we provided visual feedback of the lateral force exerted during the movement, as well as the required force pattern based on movement velocity. In the first paradigm (spatial generalization), following vFF or EVF training, generalization of learning was tested by requiring subjects to move to 14 untrained target locations (0- to ±135-around the trained location). In the second paradigm (temporal stability), following training, we examined the decay of learning over eight delay periods (0 to 90 s). Results showed that learning based on EVF did not generalize to untrained directions, whereas the generalization for the vFF was significant for targets - 45-away. In addition, the decay of learning for the EVF group was significantly faster than the FF group (a time constant of 2.72 ± 1.74 s vs. 12.53 ± 11.83 s). Collectively, our results suggest that recalibrating motor output based on explicit motion state information, in contrast to physical disturbances, uses learning mechanisms with limited spatiotemporal properties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent studies have shown that adaptation to visual feedback perturbations during arm reaching movements involves implicit and explicit learning components. Evidence also suggests that explicit, intentional learning mechanisms are largely responsible for savings--a faster recalibration compared with initial training. However, the extent explicit learning mechanisms facilitate learning and early savings (i.e., the rapid recall of previous performance) for motion state-dependent learning is generally unknown. To address this question, we compared the early savings/recall achieved by two groups of human subjects. One experienced physical perturbations (a velocity-dependent force-field, vFF) to promote adaptation that is thought to be a largely implicit process. The second was only given visual feedback of the required force-velocity relationship; subjects moved in force channels and we provided visual feedback of the lateral force exerted during the movement, as well as the required force pattern based on the movement velocity. Thus, subjects were shown explicit information on the extent the applied temporal pattern of force matched the required velocity-dependent force profile if the force-field perturbation had been applied. After training, both groups experienced a decay and washout period, which was followed by a reexposure block to assess early savings/recall. Although decay was faster for the explicit visual feedback group, the single-trial recall was similar to the physical perturbation group. Thus, compared with visual feedback perturbations, conscious modification of motor output based on motion state-dependent feedback demonstrates rapid recall, but this adjustment is less stable than adaptation based on experiencing the multisensory errors that accompany physical perturbations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Movement adaptation in response to systematic motor perturbations exhibits distinct spatial and temporal properties. These characteristics are typically studied in isolation, leaving the interaction largely unknown. Here we examined how the temporal decay of visuomotor adaptation influences the spatial generalization of the motor recalibration. First, we quantified the extent to which adaptation decayed over time. Subjects reached to a peripheral target, and a rotation was applied to the visual feedback of the unseen motion. The retention of this adaptation over different delays (0 –120 s) 1) decreased by 29.0 6.8% at the longest delay and 2) was represented by a simple exponential, with a time constant of 22.5 5.6 s. On the basis of this relationship we simulated how the spatial generalization of adaptation would change with delay. To test this directly, we trained additional subjects with the same perturbation and assessed transfer to 19 different locations (spaced 15° apart, symmetric around the trained location) and examined three delays (~4, 12, and 25 s). Consistent with the simulation, we found that generalization around the trained direction (15°) significantly decreased with delay and distance, while locations 60° displayed near-constant spatiotemporal transfer. Intermediate distances (30° and 45°) showed a difference in transfer across space, but this amount was approximately constant across time. Interestingly, the decay at the trained direction was faster than that based purely on time, suggesting that the spatial transfer of adaptation is modified by concurrent passive (time dependent) and active (movement dependent) processes. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Short-term motor adaptation exhibits distinct spatial and temporal characteristics. Here we investigated the interaction of these features, utilizing a simple motor adaptation paradigm (recalibration of reaching arm movements in response to rotated visual feedback). We examined the changes in the spatial generalization of motor adaptation for different temporal manipulations and report that the spatiotemporal generalization of motor adaptation is generally local and is influenced by both passive (time dependent) and active (movement dependent) learning processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]