Partitioning the components of visuomotor adaptation to prism-altered distance

Priot, Anne-Emmanuelle; Laboissière, Rafaël; Plantier, Justin; Prablanc, Claude; Roumes, Corinne

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.11.028

Cited by 17 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Note that a discrepancy between seen and felt hand positions is inherent to prism exposure and that such a discrepancy can induce sensory (visual and proprioceptive) adaptation (Harris, 1963; Redding et al, 2005; Priot et al, 2011). Several studies have shown that a minimum movement duration of 1 s or more is required for prism adaptation induced by visual-proprioceptive conflict (for a review, see Redding and Wallace, 1992b).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visuomotor adaptation needs a validation of prediction error by feedback error

Gaveau

Prablanc

Laurent

et al. 2014

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The processes underlying short-term plasticity induced by visuomotor adaptation to a shifted visual field are still debated. Two main sources of error can induce motor adaptation: reaching feedback errors, which correspond to visually perceived discrepancies between hand and target positions, and errors between predicted and actual visual reafferences of the moving hand. These two sources of error are closely intertwined and difficult to disentangle, as both the target and the reaching limb are simultaneously visible. Accordingly, the goal of the present study was to clarify the relative contributions of these two types of errors during a pointing task under prism-displaced vision. In “terminal feedback error” condition, viewing of their hand by subjects was allowed only at movement end, simultaneously with viewing of the target. In “movement prediction error” condition, viewing of the hand was limited to movement duration, in the absence of any visual target, and error signals arose solely from comparisons between predicted and actual reafferences of the hand. In order to prevent intentional corrections of errors, a subthreshold, progressive stepwise increase in prism deviation was used, so that subjects remained unaware of the visual deviation applied in both conditions. An adaptive aftereffect was observed in the “terminal feedback error” condition only. As far as subjects remained unaware of the optical deviation and self-assigned pointing errors, prediction error alone was insufficient to induce adaptation. These results indicate a critical role of hand-to-target feedback error signals in visuomotor adaptation; consistent with recent neurophysiological findings, they suggest that a combination of feedback and prediction error signals is necessary for eliciting aftereffects. They also suggest that feedback error updates the prediction of reafferences when a visual perturbation is introduced gradually and cognitive factors are eliminated or strongly attenuated.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visuomotor adaptation needs a validation of prediction error by feedback error

Gaveau

Prablanc

Laurent

et al. 2014

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If the mismatch is easily resolved in motor coordinates (e.g., always activate the biceps more strongly, regardless of the target's position), the movement plan can be updated such that we successfully reach the targets (e.g., Baraduc and Wolpert 2002;Burge et al 2008;Galea and Miall 2006;Hinder et al 2010;Körding and Wolpert 2004;Krakauer 2009;Saijo and Gomi 2010;Tseng et al 2007; Wang and Sainburg 2005;Wei and Körding 2009). If the mismatch is more easily resolved in sensory coordinates (e.g., the visual position is rightward of the proprioceptive position regardless of the movement direction), the conflict can be resolved by updating the way in which sensory information is interpreted (Baraduc and Wolpert 2002;Block and Bastian 2012;Priot et al 2010; Wallace 1988, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Alignment to natural and imposed mismatches between the senses

Kooij

Brenner

Beers

et al. 2013

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does the nervous system continuously realign the senses so that objects are seen and felt in the same place? Conflicting answers to this question have been given. Research imposing a sensory mismatch has provided evidence that the nervous system realigns the senses to reduce the mismatch. Other studies have shown that when subjects point with the unseen hand to visual targets, their end points show visual-proprioceptive biases that do not disappear after episodes of visual feedback. These biases are indicative of intersensory mismatches that the nervous system does not align for. Here, we directly compare how the nervous system deals with natural and imposed mismatches. Subjects moved a hand-held cube to virtual cubes appearing at pseudorandom locations in three-dimensional space. We alternated blocks in which subjects moved without visual feedback of the hand with feedback blocks in which we rendered a cube representing the hand-held cube. In feedback blocks, we rotated the visual feedback by 5° relative to the subject's head, creating an imposed mismatch between vision and proprioception on top of any natural mismatches. Realignment occurred quickly but was incomplete. We found more realignment to imposed mismatches than to natural mismatches. We propose that this difference is related to the way in which the visual information changed when subjects entered the experiment: the imposed mismatches were different from the mismatch in daily life, so alignment started from scratch, whereas the natural mismatches were not imposed by the experimenter, so subjects are likely to have entered the experiment partly aligned.

show abstract

“…The functional relationship between actual and estimated target distances was analyzed using a linear model (Ebenholtz 1981;Mon-Williams and Tresilian 1999;Priot et al 2010Priot et al , 2011. For each subject and each condition, the relationship between the pointing distance (dependent variable) and the actual (physical) target distance (independent variable) was fitted with a line, using a leastsquares criterion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These authors ascribed the observed distance aftereffects to a visual calibration: The prism-induced conflict between altered vergence and unaltered distance cues gave rise to a recalibration of the mapping between the vergence signal and egocentric perceived distance. Priot et al (2011) found that visual calibration and EMP both contribute to adaptation to prism-induced alteration of perceived distance. In contrast to visual recalibration, EMP develops in response to sustained fusional vergence demand and does not require any cue conflict.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In spite of direct evidence for the EMP hypothesis, little is known about the underlying mechanisms of EMP. A potential problem with the method commonly used to assess EMP-related changes in perceived distance, namely open-loop pointing (Owens and Leibowitz 1980;Heuer and Lüschow 1983;Shebilske et al 1983;Priot et al 2011), is that it is subject to visuomotor (e.g., limb proprioceptive) drift (Wann and Ibrahim 1992;Brown et al 2003), which can mimic the perceptual effect of EMP. We sought to determine whether EMP is a visual phenomenon, unrelated to changes in the relationship between a specific effector and the visual input.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How perceived egocentric distance varies with changes in tonic vergence

Priot

Neveu²,

Sillan

et al. 2012

Exp Brain Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the eye muscle potentiation (EMP) hypothesis, sustained vergence leads to changes in egocentric perceived distance. This perceptual effect has been attributed to a change in the resting or tonic state of vergence. The goal of the present study was to test the EMP hypothesis by quantifying the relationship between prism-induced changes in tonic vergence and corresponding changes in perceived distance and by measuring the dynamics of changes in perceived distance. During a 10-min exposure to 5-diopter base-out prisms that increased the vergence demand, thirteen right-handed subjects pointed to visual targets located within reaching space using their left hand, without visual feedback. Pre- and post-exposure tests assessed tonic vergence through phoria measurements and egocentric distance estimate through pointing to visual targets with each hand successively, without visual feedback. Similar distance aftereffects were observed for both hands, although only the left hand was used during exposure, indicating that these aftereffects are mediated by visual processes rather than by visuomotor interactions. The distance aftereffects were significantly correlated with prism-induced changes in phoria, demonstrating a relationship between perceived distance and the level of tonic vergence. Changes in perceived distance increased monotonically across trials during prism exposure and remained stable during the post-test, indicating a long time constant for these perceptual effects, consistent with current models of the vergence control system. Overall, these results support the hypothesis that vergence plays a role in reduced-cue distance perception. They further illustrate that variations in tonic vergence influence perceived distance by altering the sensed vergence effort.

show abstract

Partitioning the components of visuomotor adaptation to prism-altered distance

Cited by 17 publications

References 86 publications

Visuomotor adaptation needs a validation of prediction error by feedback error

Visuomotor adaptation needs a validation of prediction error by feedback error

Alignment to natural and imposed mismatches between the senses

How perceived egocentric distance varies with changes in tonic vergence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About