The extent of interlimb transfer following adaptation to a novel visuomotor condition does not depend on awareness of the condition

Wang, Jinsung; Joshi, Mukta; Lei, Yuming

doi:10.1152/jn.00254.2011

Cited by 55 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although intermanual transfer was observed previously (Halsband, 1992;Criscimagna-Hemminger et al, 2003;van Mier and Petersen, 2006;Wang et al, 2011), it was not found in the nonmirror task of the present study. This might have been because asymmetrical intermanual transfer occurred instead when using the symmetric mirror motor task (Kirsch and Hoffmann, 2010).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 73%

Human Motor Plasticity Induced by Mirror Visual Feedback

Nojima¹,

Mima²,

Koganemaru³

et al. 2012

J. Neurosci.

153

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The clinical use of mirror visual feedback (MVF) was initially introduced to alleviate phantom pain, and has since been applied to the improvement of hemiparesis following stroke. However, it is not known whether MVF can restore motor function by producing plastic changes in the human primary motor cortex (M1). Here, we used transcranial magnetic stimulation to test whether M1 plasticity is a physiological substrate of MVF-induced motor behavioral improvement. MVF intervention in normal volunteers using a mirror box improved motor behavior and enhanced excitatory functions of the M1. Moreover, behavioral and physiological measures of MVFinduced changes were positively correlated with each other. Improved motor performance occurred after observation of a simple action, but not after repetitive motor training of the nontarget hand without MVF, suggesting the crucial importance of visual feedback. The beneficial effects of MVF were disrupted by continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) over the M1, but not the control site in the occipital cortex. However, MVF following cTBS could further improve the motor functions. Our findings indicate that M1 plasticity, especially in its excitatory connections, is an essential component of MVF-based therapies.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 73%

Human Motor Plasticity Induced by Mirror Visual Feedback

Nojima¹,

Mima²,

Koganemaru³

et al. 2012

J. Neurosci.

153

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, we have repeatedly observed the direct-effects of visuomotor adaptation with one arm on subsequent performance with the other arm (e.g., Lei and Wang 2014;Sainburg and Wang 2002;Wang and Sainburg 2006), although we often failed to observe after-effects in similar conditions that involved interlimb transfer (unpublished observations). The direct-effects observed in our studies indicate that initial visuomotor adaptation with one arm led to the formation of an internal model, because these effects are not influenced by the participants' cognitive awareness (Wang et al 2011; also see Taylor et al 2011). These findings and observations indicate that the aforementioned assumption may not be correct; more importantly, they also indicate that conclusions from a study could differ markedly, depending on whether they were based on direct-or after-effects data (e.g., substantial interlimb transfer based on direct-effects, no transfer based on after-effects).…”

supporting

confidence: 59%

Direct-effects and after-effects of visuomotor adaptation with one arm on subsequent performance with the other arm

Wang

Lei

2015

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adapting to a novel sensorimotor condition is generally thought to result in the formation of an internal representation associated with the novel sensorimotor transform. While the presence of after-effects following sensorimotor adaptation is taken as evidence that such an internal representation was developed as a result of adaptation, it remains unclear whether the absence of after-effects following sensorimotor adaptation indicates that no internal representation was developed. In the present study, we examined this question by having individuals adapt to a 30° visual rotation with one arm first and testing 1) how the initial adaptation would influence subsequent performance with the other arm under the same visual condition (called direct-effects) or under a normal visual condition (called after-effects); or 2) how the initial adaptation that occurred at one workspace location would influence subsequent performance at another location with the same arm under the same or a normal visual condition. Results indicated that initial adaptation with one arm significantly influenced subsequent performance with the other in terms of direct- but not after-effects and that initial adaptation at one workspace location significantly influenced subsequent performance at a new location with the same arm in terms of both direct- and after-effects, but to different extents. These findings indicate that formation of a neural representation associated with a novel visuomotor transform does not always result in after-effects and suggest that visuomotor adaptation may involve multiple aspects of a neural representation, some of which are effector independent and some of which are effector dependent.

show abstract

“…However, as practice progressed actors began to make increasingly larger errors in the clockwise direction, meaning that they were overcompensating for the perturbation. The after-effects later demonstrated by the actor group were similar to a control actor group that was not provided with an explicit strategy (see also Wang et al 2011). These authors argued that implicit learning processes came to dominate explicit knowledge and awareness.…”

Section: Explicit Processes Encouraged Through Observationmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…However, observers showed no evidence of recognition unless sequences were observed in practice without the corresponding hand actions (see also Kelly et al 2003). Subsequently, Heyes and Foster (2002;also Bird and Heyes 2005) showed that observers were aware of the repetition in a short training sequence, in comparison with a longer sequence, but even in this former case, observational practice led to effector-specific learning, often taken as evidence that a more implicit, motor-based representation was acquired (yet see Wang et al 2011).…”

Section: Implicit Learning Through Observationmentioning

confidence: 99%

In the absence of physical practice, observation and imagery do not result in updating of internal models for aiming

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The presence of after-effects in adaptation tasks implies that an existing internal model has been updated. Previously, we showed that although observers adapted to a visuomotor perturbation, they did not show after-effects. In this experiment, we tested 2 further observer groups and an actor group. Observers were now actively engaged in watching (encouraged through imagery and movement estimation), with one group physically practising for 25% of the trials (mixed). Participants estimated the hand movements that produced various cursor trajectories and/or their own hand movement from a preceding trial. These trials also allowed us to assess the development of explicit knowledge as a function of the three practice conditions. The pure observation group did not show after-effects, whereas the actor and mixed groups did. The pure observation group improved their ability to estimate hand movement of the video model. Although the actor and mixed groups improved in actual reaching accuracy, they did not improve in explicit estimation. The mixed group was more accurate in reaching during adaptation and showed larger after-effects than the actors. We suggest that observation encourages an explicit mode of learning, enabling performance benefits without corresponding changes to an internal model of the mapping between output and sensory input. However, some physical practice interspersed with observation can change the manner with which learning is achieved, encouraging implicit learning and the updating of an existing internal model.

show abstract

The extent of interlimb transfer following adaptation to a novel visuomotor condition does not depend on awareness of the condition

Cited by 55 publications

References 24 publications

Human Motor Plasticity Induced by Mirror Visual Feedback

Human Motor Plasticity Induced by Mirror Visual Feedback

Direct-effects and after-effects of visuomotor adaptation with one arm on subsequent performance with the other arm

In the absence of physical practice, observation and imagery do not result in updating of internal models for aiming

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About