Sensorimotor memory of weight asymmetry in object manipulation

Bursztyn, Lulu L.C.D.; Flanagan, J. Randall

doi:10.1007/s00221-007-1173-z

Cited by 30 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When subjects perform subsequent lifts involving both a hand switch and object rotation (HS+OR), the object dynamics reverses in R E , but the torque remains unchanged in R I . It has been shown that, on the first trial after a change of manipulation context, subjects exhibit a large negative transfer in OR condition, but zero transfer in HS and HS+OR conditions [12]. However, this result differs from findings reported by studies of reaching movements using force fields [22].…”

Section: Introductioncontrasting

confidence: 57%

Learned Manipulation at Unconstrained Contacts Does Not Transfer across Hands

Choi

Gordon

et al. 2014

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies about sensorimotor control of the human hand have focused on how dexterous manipulation is learned and generalized. Here we address this question by testing the extent to which learned manipulation can be transferred when the contralateral hand is used and/or object orientation is reversed. We asked subjects to use a precision grip to lift a grip device with an asymmetrical mass distribution while minimizing object roll during lifting by generating a compensatory torque. Subjects were allowed to grasp anywhere on the object’s vertical surfaces, and were therefore able to modulate both digit positions and forces. After every block of eight trials performed in one manipulation context (i.e., using the right hand and at a given object orientation), subjects had to lift the same object in the second context for one trial (transfer trial). Context changes were made by asking subjects to switch the hand used to lift the object and/or rotate the object 180° about a vertical axis. Therefore, three transfer conditions, hand switch (HS), object rotation (OR), and both hand switch and object rotation (HS+OR), were tested and compared with hand matched control groups who did not experience context changes. We found that subjects in all transfer conditions adapted digit positions across multiple transfer trials similar to the learning of control groups, regardless of different changes of contexts. Moreover, subjects in both HS and HS+OR group also adapted digit forces similar to the control group, suggesting independent learning of the left hand. In contrast, the OR group showed significant negative transfer of the compensatory torque due to an inability to adapt digit forces. Our results indicate that internal representations of dexterous manipulation tasks may be primarily built through the hand used for learning and cannot be transferred across hands.

show abstract

Section: Introductioncontrasting

confidence: 57%

Learned Manipulation at Unconstrained Contacts Does Not Transfer across Hands

Choi

Gordon

et al. 2014

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These findings suggest that subjects started learning context B without any transfer from the previously learned context A, even when the 1-h break was long enough for the interference effect to decay to a minimum level. This phenomenon is consistent with those reported by previous studies (Bursztyn and Flanagan 2008;Fu and Santello 2012;Zhang et al 2010), which showed no task-level learning transfer from context A to B. Furthermore, here we demonstrate that lack of learning generalization in manipulation tasks was not due to lack of context cues or anterograde interference caused by learning a context immediately preceding the new context.…”

Section: Experiments 3: Time-dependent Interference On the Transfer Trialsupporting

confidence: 94%

Retention and interference of learned dexterous manipulation: interaction between multiple sensorimotor processes

Santello

2015

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fu Q, Santello M. Retention and interference of learned dexterous manipulation: interaction between multiple sensorimotor processes. J Neurophysiol 113: 144 -155, 2015. First published October 1, 2014; doi:10.1152/jn.00348.2014.-An object can be used in multiple contexts, each requiring different hand actions. How the central nervous system builds and maintains memory of such dexterous manipulations remains unclear. We conducted experiments in which human subjects had to learn and recall manipulations performed in two contexts, A and B. Both contexts involved lifting the same L-shaped object whose geometry cued its asymmetrical mass distribution. Correct performance required producing a torque on the vertical handle at object lift onset to prevent it from tilting. The torque direction depended on the context, i.e., object orientation, which was changed by 180°object rotation about a vertical axis. With an A 1 B 1 A 2 context switching paradigm, subjects learned A 1 in the first block of eight trials as indicated by a torque approaching the required one. However, subjects made large errors in anticipating the required torque when switching to B 1 immediately after A 1 (negative transfer), as well as when they had to recall A 1 when switching to A 2 after learning B through another block of eight lifts (retrieval interference). Classic sensorimotor learning theories attribute such interferences to multi-rate, multistate error-driven updates of internal models. However, by systematically changing the interblock break duration and within-block number of trials, our results suggest an alternative explanation underlying interference and retention of dexterous manipulation. Specifically, we identified and quantified through a novel computational model the nonlinear interaction between two sensorimotor mechanisms: a shortlived, context-independent, use-dependent sensorimotor memory and a context-sensitive, error-based learning process. sensorimotor; manipulation; interference; retention DEXTEROUS MANIPULATION is thought to rely on building an internal representation of the task or object dynamics that can be updated through trial-by-trial learning to achieve a stable performance (Flanagan et al. 2001;Nowak et al. 2007;Salimi et al. 2000). However, the underlying sensorimotor mechanisms are not well understood. The properties of the learned representation of a motor task can be evaluated by generalization or retrieval protocols in which subjects are asked to generalize a previously learned task to a new context or recall the learned task in the same context. Until recently, such protocols have been mostly applied to reaching tasks (for review, see , which has led to the establishment of several models of sensorimotor learning. For instance, error-based learning suggests that the central nervous system (CNS) updates the internal model of the task by using errors made in the previous trial(s) (Smith et al. 2006), whereas model-free learning is based on reinforcement and/or usedependent plasticity (Huang et al. 2011). Desp...

show abstract

“…Several lines of evidence support the latter scenario. Specifically, subjects are unable to fully transfer manipulative forces following an object rotation that changes the learned mapping between digit forces and object properties, for example, texture (Edin et al, 1992;Quaney and Cole, 2004) or mass distribution (Salimi et al, 2000(Salimi et al, , 2003Bursztyn and Flanagan, 2008;Albert et al, 2009;Ingram et al, 2010;Zhang et al, 2010).…”

Section: Are Learned Manipulations Always Transferable?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interestingly, however, there are instances where the congruence between manipulation task and hand frame of reference can be broken by changing the hand position relative to the object without interfering with transfer of learned manipulation (Quaney and Cole, 2004;Bursztyn and Flanagan, 2008). These two studies, together with the above-cited work, suggest that the interference to learning transfer is not caused by the lack of congruence between hand and manipulation frames of reference per se, but rather by the inability of the CNS to mentally rotate the action as a function of the object's new orientation relative to the hand.…”

Section: Are Learned Manipulations Always Transferable?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Learning did not transfer readily as subjects failed to mentally rotate the learned action (i.e., the direction of compensatory torque) in response to the new object center of mass location. Learning of compensatory torque also does not transfer from one hand to another (Bursztyn and Flanagan, 2008;Jesunathadas et al, 2010). These results suggest that learning of manipulative actions had occurred in a hand, rather than an object, frame of reference.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Transfer of Learned Manipulation following Changes in Degrees of Freedom

Fu¹,

Hasan²,

Santello³

2011

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study was designed to determine whether manipulation learned with a set of digits can be transferred to grips involving a different number of digits, and possible mechanisms underlying such transfer. The goal of the task was to exert a torque and vertical forces on a visually symmetrical object at object lift onset to balance the external torque caused by asymmetrical mass distribution. Subjects learned this manipulation through consecutive practice using one grip type (two or three digits), after which they performed the same task but with another grip type (e.g., after adding or removing one digit, respectively). Subjects were able to switch grip type without compromising the behavioral outcome (i.e., the direction, timing, and magnitude of the torque exerted on the object was unchanged), despite the use of significantly different digit force-position coordination patterns in the two grip types. Our results support the transfer of learning for anticipatory control of manipulation and indicate that the CNS forms an internal model of the manipulation task independent of the effectors that are used to learn it. We propose that sensory information about the new digit placement-resulting from adding or removing a digit immediately after the switch in grip type-plays an important role in the accurate modulation of new digit force distributions. We discuss our results in relation to studies of manipulation reporting lack of learning transfer and propose a theoretical framework that accounts for failure or success of motor learning generalization.

show abstract

Sensorimotor memory of weight asymmetry in object manipulation

Cited by 30 publications

References 21 publications

Learned Manipulation at Unconstrained Contacts Does Not Transfer across Hands

Learned Manipulation at Unconstrained Contacts Does Not Transfer across Hands

Retention and interference of learned dexterous manipulation: interaction between multiple sensorimotor processes

Transfer of Learned Manipulation following Changes in Degrees of Freedom

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About