High variability impairs motor learning regardless of whether it affects task performance

Motor variability plays an important role in motor learning, although the exact mechanisms of how variability affects learning are not well understood. Recent evidence suggests that motor variability may have different effects on learning in redundant tasks, depending on whether it is present in the task space (where it affects task performance) or in the null space (where it has no effect on task performance). We examined the effect of directly introducing null and task space variability using a manipulandum during the learning of a motor task. Participants learned a bimanual shuffleboard task for 2 days, where their goal was to slide a virtual puck as close as possible toward a target. Critically, the distance traveled by the puck was determined by the sum of the left- and right-hand velocities, which meant that there was redundancy in the task. Participants were divided into five groups, based on both the dimension in which the variability was introduced and the amount of variability that was introduced during training. Results showed that although all groups were able to reduce error with practice, learning was affected more by the amount of variability introduced rather than the dimension in which variability was introduced. Specifically, groups with higher movement variability during practice showed larger errors at the end of practice compared with groups that had low variability during learning. These results suggest that although introducing variability can increase exploration of new solutions, this may adversely affect the ability to retain the learned solution. NEW & NOTEWORTHY We examined the role of introducing variability during motor learning in a redundant task. The presence of redundancy allows variability to be introduced in different dimensions: the task space (where it affects task performance) or the null space (where it does not affect task performance). We found that introducing variability affected learning adversely, but the amount of variability was more critical than the dimension in which variability was introduced.

[1]  Konrad P Kording,et al.  Using noise to shape motor learning. , 2017, Journal of neurophysiology.

[2]  Rajiv Ranganathan,et al.  Motor Learning through Induced Variability at the Task Goal and Execution Redundancy Levels , 2010, Journal of motor behavior.

[3]  Robert L Sainburg,et al.  Shared bimanual tasks elicit bimanual reflexes during movement. , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[4]  J. A. Adams,et al.  Warm-up decrement in performance on the pursuit-rotor. , 1952, The American journal of psychology.

[5]  C A Wrisberg,et al.  Further tests of Schmidt's schema theory: development of a schema rule for a coincident timing task. , 1979, Journal of motor behavior.

[6]  Paola Cesari,et al.  Body-goal Variability Mapping in an Aiming Task , 2006, Biological Cybernetics.

[7]  D. Rosenbaum,et al.  Hand path priming in manual obstacle avoidance: evidence that the dorsal stream does not only control visually guided actions in real time. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  P. Fitts,et al.  INFORMATION CAPACITY OF DISCRETE MOTOR RESPONSES. , 1964, Journal of experimental psychology.

[9]  N. Stergiou,et al.  Optimal Movement Variability: A New Theoretical Perspective for Neurologic Physical Therapy , 2006, Journal of neurologic physical therapy : JNPT.

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

[11]  B. Kleiner,et al.  Distant Transfer in Coincident Timing as a Function of Variability of Practice , 1984 .

[12]  Rajiv Ranganathan,et al.  Changing Up the Routine: Intervention-Induced Variability in Motor Learning , 2013, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[13]  Roger Bartlett,et al.  Movement Systems as Dynamical Systems , 2003, Sports medicine.

[14]  J. Krakauer,et al.  How is a motor skill learned? Change and invariance at the levels of task success and trajectory control. , 2012, Journal of neurophysiology.

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

[16]  Jonathan B Dingwell,et al.  Trial-to-trial dynamics and learning in a generalized, redundant reaching task. , 2013, Journal of neurophysiology.

[17]  Jonathan B. Dingwell,et al.  Error Correction and the Structure of Inter-Trial Fluctuations in a Redundant Movement Task , 2016, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[18]  Dagmar Sternad,et al.  Neuromotor Noise Is Malleable by Amplifying Perceived Errors , 2016, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[19]  A. Haith,et al.  Model-based and model-free mechanisms of human motor learning. , 2013, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

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

[21]  R. Schmidt,et al.  VARIABILITY OF PRACTICE AND IMPLICIT MOTOR LEARNING , 1997 .

[22]  Rajiv Ranganathan,et al.  Influence of motor learning on utilizing path redundancy , 2010, Neuroscience Letters.

[23]  J. V. Rossum.  SCHMIDT'S SCHEMA THEORY: THE EMPIRICAL BASE OF THE VARIABILITY OF PRACTICE HYPOTHESIS , 1990 .

[24]  R. J. van Beers,et al.  What Autocorrelation Tells Us about Motor Variability: Insights from Dart Throwing , 2013, PloS one.

[25]  Jonathan B. Dingwell,et al.  Do Humans Optimally Exploit Redundancy to Control Step Variability in Walking? , 2010, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[26]  Dagmar Sternad,et al.  Persistence of reduced neuromotor noise in long-term motor skill learning. , 2016, Journal of neurophysiology.

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

[28]  Dagmar Sternad,et al.  Neuromotor Noise, Error Tolerance and Velocity-Dependent Costs in Skilled Performance , 2011, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[29]  Olivier White,et al.  Use-Dependent and Error-Based Learning of Motor Behaviors , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[30]  D. Sternad,et al.  Variability in motor learning: relocating, channeling and reducing noise , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[31]  R A Scheidt,et al.  Learning to move amid uncertainty. , 2001, Journal of neurophysiology.

[32]  Yohsuke R. Miyamoto,et al.  Temporal structure of motor variability is dynamically regulated and predicts motor learning ability , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

[33]  Kang He,et al.  The Statistical Determinants of the Speed of Motor Learning , 2016, PLoS Comput. Biol..

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

[35]  D. Sternad,et al.  Decomposition of variability in the execution of goal-oriented tasks: three components of skill improvement. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[36]  Moxley Se,et al.  Schema: The Variability of Practice Hypothesis , 1979 .

[37]  Dagmar Sternad,et al.  Directionality in distribution and temporal structure of variability in skill acquisition , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[38]  Mark L Latash,et al.  Stages in learning motor synergies: a view based on the equilibrium-point hypothesis. , 2010, Human movement science.

[39]  Eli Brenner,et al.  Random walk of motor planning in task-irrelevant dimensions. , 2013, Journal of neurophysiology.

[40]  Ashitava Ghosal,et al.  Exploration of joint redundancy but not task space variability facilitates supervised motor learning , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[41]  Rajiv Ranganathan,et al.  Emergent flexibility in motor learning , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.