Emergent flexibility in motor learning

We examined the effect of exploring redundant solutions during practice in enhancing the ability to flexibly use them to achieve a task goal. Three groups used different degrees of path redundancy to perform a virtual interception task in which they attempted to hit a stationary target by moving around a stationary obstacle. The low-variability group always practiced with the same position of the obstacle on all trials. The medium-variability and high-variability groups practiced with the obstacle in different positions within a range of 1 and 2 cm respectively. After eight blocks of practice, all participants were transferred to two tests: (a) a fixed obstacle test where the condition was the same as that practiced by the low-variability group, and (b) a variable obstacle test where the condition was the same as that practiced by the high-variability group. Results showed that the low-variability group had the most accurate performance both in the fixed obstacle and the variable obstacle test. The low-variability group showed the least path variability during the fixed obstacle test but was also able to adapt to the different positions of the obstacle during the variable obstacle test. It appears that flexibility in interceptive tasks is emergent from learning a particular task-relevant parameter related to the target location.

[1]  Digby Elliott,et al.  Vision and motor control , 1992 .

[2]  C. Dugas,et al.  Strategy and learning effects on perturbed movements: an electromyographic and kinematic study , 1989, Behavioural Brain Research.

[3]  O. I. Fukson,et al.  The spinal frog takes into account the scheme of its body during the wiping reflex. , 1980, Science.

[4]  J. Kelso,et al.  Exploring a vibratory systems analysis of human movement production. , 1980, Journal of neurophysiology.

[5]  R. Schmidt.  A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. , 1975 .

[6]  John B. Shea,et al.  Context Effects in Memory and Learning Movement Information , 1983 .

[7]  J. Cooke,et al.  Changes in the variability of movement trajectories with practice. , 1987, Journal of motor behavior.

[8]  T. D. Lee,et al.  What is repeated in a repetition? Effects of practice conditions on motor skill acquisition. , 1991, Physical therapy.

[9]  J. Diedrichsen.  Optimal Task-Dependent Changes of Bimanual Feedback Control and Adaptation , 2007, Current Biology.

[10]  Sheila Lennon,et al.  Advances in Motor Learning and Control , 1997 .

[11]  Roscoe Conkling Brown,et al.  Classical studies on physical activity , 1968 .

[12]  W. G. Darling,et al.  Kinematic variability of grasp movements as a function of practice and movement speed , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[13]  M. Latash,et al.  Testing hypotheses and the advancement of science: recent attempts to falsify the equilibrium point hypothesis , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[14]  J. Deese.  The psychology of learning , 1952 .

[15]  Mark L. Latash,et al.  Learning a pointing task with a kinematically redundant limb: Emerging synergies and patterns of final position variability , 1999 .

[16]  Richard F. Thompson,et al.  Topics in learning and performance , 1972 .

[17]  G. Stelmach,et al.  Tutorials in Motor Behavior , 1980 .

[18]  R. Bootsma,et al.  Timing an attacking forehand drive in table tennis. , 1990 .

[19]  Gregor Schöner,et al.  The uncontrolled manifold concept: identifying control variables for a functional task , 1999, Experimental Brain Research.

[20]  M. Latash,et al.  Motor Control Strategies Revealed in the Structure of Motor Variability , 2002, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[21]  G. Schöner.  Recent Developments and Problems in Human Movement Science and Their Conceptual Implications , 1995 .

[22]  D. Domkin,et al.  Structure of joint variability in bimanual pointing tasks , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[23]  J. Scholz,et al.  Learning a throwing task is associated with differential changes in the use of motor abundance , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[24]  M. HenryF.,et al.  Specificity vs.generality in learning motor skill , 1968 .

[25]  C. Burt.  THE PSYCHOLOGY OF LEARNING , 1958 .

[26]  J. Shea,et al.  Contextual interference effects on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of a motor skill. , 1979 .

[27]  G. A. Arutyunyan,et al.  Organization of movements on execution by man of an exact postural task , 1970 .

[28]  Richard A. Magill,et al.  Memory and control of action , 1983 .

[29]  J. Foley.  The co-ordination and regulation of movements , 1968 .

[30]  J. T. Massey,et al.  Spatial trajectories and reaction times of aimed movements: effects of practice, uncertainty, and change in target location. , 1981, Journal of neurophysiology.

[31]  L. Proteau.  Chapter 4 On The Specificity of Learning and the Role of Visual Information for Movement Control , 1992 .

[32]  P. N. Kugler,et al.  1 On the Concept of Coordinative Structures as Dissipative Structures: I. Theoretical Lines of Convergence* , 1980 .

[33]  R. Magill,et al.  American Psychological Association, Inc. The Locus of Contextual Interference in Motor-Skill Acquisition i , 2022 .

[34]  O. I. Fukson,et al.  Adaptability of innate motor patterns and motor control mechanisms , 1986, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[35]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[36]  A. G. Feldman,et al.  The origin and use of positional frames of reference in motor control , 1995, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.