Proprioception and the production of adaptation and intermanual transfer to prismatic displacement

Abstract

Proprioceptive adaptation to prismatic displacement and resultant intermanual transfer were investigated in two experiments. In Experiment 1, magnitude of adaptation and transfer were assessed as a result of the reduction of felt sensation via hypnotic anesthesia in an adapting limb. Such anesthesia reduced the magnitude of adaptation in that limb and resultant transfer in the nonadapting limb to a nonsignificant level. Such was not the case when the adapting limb was nonanesthetic. In Experiment 2, adaptation and transfer magnitude were assessed as the result of anesthetic induction in a nonadapting limb. When this was the case, adaptation was produced in the adapting limb but not in the anesthetized, nonadapting limb. The results of the two experiments generally point to proprioception as being the major source of input to the production of intermanual transfer in a prismatic adaptation task. 113When subjects adapt to a prismatically displaced environment, a portion of the adaptation magnitude is represented by a component responsible for felt limb location or orientation (

Prism adaptation with hypnotically induced limb anesthesia: The critical roles of head position and prism type

“…In fact, goggle removal from the right side of the subject resulted in the production of "adaptation" at a level that significantly exceeded what would be produced by leaving the prisms over the subject's eyes for postexposure assessments (which is possible only with Risley prisms). Spanos et al (1983, p. 218) Wallace & Fisher, 1979;Wallace & Garrett, 1973, 1975 reporting nonsignificant results but in the direction we report here, it would appear inaccurate for them to claim that this constitutes a failure to replicate our earlier studies. With the large difference between our respective adaptation variances, it would seem prudent to determine why this occurred.…”

“…However, if proprioceptive feedback and felt arm sensations are disrupted as a result of inducing hypnotic anesthesia in the adapting limb, subjects fail to adapt to the prism displacement. We have argued that such anesthesia disrupts proprioceptive feedback from the arm and, as a result, adaptation does not occur (e.g., Wallace & Fisher, 1979). Spanos et al (1981) failed to replicate our effect; that is, they reported that adaptation to prism displacement occurs regardless of whether subjects are asked to perform a task with hypnotic anesthesia in the adapting limb or without it.…”

“…Recently, Spanos and his colleagues (Spanos, Dubreuil, Saad, & Gorassini, 1983;Spanos, Gorassini, & Petrusic, 1981) reported two failures to replicate a phenomenon involving hypnotic anesthesia which has been reported by our laboratory and by that of others (Wallace & Fisher, 1979;Wallace & Garrett, 1973,1975Welch & Snyder, cited in Welch, 1978, p. 27). The phenomenon involves adapting to prism displacement when hypnotic anesthesia is present in an adapting limb.…”

“…The apparatus was similar to that employed by Wallace and Fisher (1979). This structure consisted of a three-layer, rectangular wood frame (77 cm high, 62 em wide, and 62 ern deep) open on the side facing the subject.…”

“…Requests for reprints should be sent to Benjamin Wallace, Department of Psychology, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH 44115. et al, 1981), adaptation would still occur even if the adapting arm was hynotically anesthetized. When the visual target is absent, as it was in the Wallace and Fisher (1979) study, visual guiding and error-corrective feedback are not possible, and subjects must rely upon proprioceptive feedback to adapt. When this feedback is not possible because of the introduction of hypnotic anesthesia in the adapting limb, adaptation does not occur.…”