Eye movements and imitation learning: Intentional disruption of expectation

Abstract

Over repeated viewings of motion along a quasi-random path, ability to reproduce that path from memory improves. To assess the role of expectations and sequence context on such learning, subjects eye movements were measured while trajectories were viewed for subsequent reproduction. As a sequence of motions was repeated, subjects' eye movements became anticipatory, leading the stimulus' motions. To investigate how prediction errors affected eye movements and imitation learning, we injected an occasional deviant motion into a well-learned stimulus sequence, violating subjects' expectation about the motion that would be seen. This unexpected direction of motion in the stimulus sequence did not impair reproduction of the sequence. The externally induced prediction errors promoted one-shot learning: During the very next stimulus presentation, their eye movements showed that subjects now expected the new sequence item to reappear. A second experiment showed that an associative mismatch can facilitate accurate reproduction of an unexpected stimulus. After a deviant sequence item was presented, imitation accuracy for sequences that contained the deviant direction of motion was reduced relative to sequences that restored the original direction of motions. These findings demonstrate that in the context of a familiar sequence, unexpected events can play an important role in learning the sequence.

Davida Teller Award Lecture 2013: The importance of prediction and anticipation in the control of smooth pursuit eye movements

“…Boman & Hotson, 1992;Barnes & Schmid, 2002). When the motion is unpredictable-i.e., the direction, velocity, or onset times are randomly chosen-anticipatory smooth eye movements depend on the properties of the motions seen or tracked in the recent past (Kowler, Martins, & Pavel, 1984, Kowler, 1989Heinen, Badler, & Ting, 2005;de Hemptinne, Nozaradan, Duvivier, Lefevre, & Missal, 2007;Collins & Barnes, 2009;Maryott, Noyce, & Sekuler, 2011;Santos, Gnang, & Kowler, 2012). Anticipatory responses have also been observed during pursuit of targets that are intermittently occluded.…”

Anticipatory smooth eye movements with random-dot kinematograms

“…Anticipatory smooth eye movements are smooth eye movements in the direction of expected future target motion that are observed either prior to the onset of target motion or prior to an expected change in the direction of motion (Badler, Lefèvre, & Missal, 2010; Boman & Hotson, 1988, 1992; de Hemptinne, Lefèvre, & Missal, 2008; Eggert, Ladda, & Straube, 2009; Heinen, Badler, & Ting, 2005; Jarrett & Barnes, 2002; Kowler, 1989; Kowler & Steinman, 1979a, 1979b; Ladda, Eggert, Glasauer, & Straube, 2007). Anticipatory smooth eye movements can be elicited by symbolic cues that disclose the direction of future motion (Badler, et al, 2010; de Hemptinne et al, 2008; Eggert et al, 2009; Jarrett & Barnes, 2002; Kowler, 1989; Ladda et al, 2007; Winges & Soechting, 2011), or, in the absence of cues, by expectations derived from the prior history of target motions (Burke & Barnes, 2008; Collins & Barnes, 2009; de Hemptinne, Nozaradan, Duvivier, Lefèvre, & Missal, 2007; Heinen et al, 2005; Kowler, 1989; Kowler, Martins, & Pavel, 1984; Maryott, Noyce, & Sekuler, 2011; Yang & Lisberger, 2010). Neurophysiological studies in monkeys have linked anticipatory smooth eye movements to activity in the supplementary eye fields (SEF), pointing to SEF as a site that may be responsible for the initiation or control of the anticipatory movements (de Hemptinne et al, 2008; Heinen, 1995; Missal & Heinen, 2004).…”

Oddball distractors demand attention: Neural and behavioral responses to predictability in the flanker task

“…This ability to extend environmental structure to predict forthcoming stimuli facilitates many cognitive tasks, from identifying objects (Biederman, Mezzanotte, & Rabinowitz, 1982) to planning and executing behaviors (Maryott, Noyce, & Sekuler, 2011) to appropriately allocating attention (Posner, 1980). Most research into predictive processing has considered the impact of regularities among a task’s targets, a focus which is entirely understandable, as such regularities clearly facilitate cognitive performance.…”