The influence of robotic guidance on error detection and correction mechanisms.

New technologies have expanded the available methods to help individuals learn or re-learn motor skills. Despite equivocal evidence for the impact of robotic guidance for motor skill acquisition (Marchal-Crespo, McHughen, Cramer, & Reinkensmeyer, 2010), we have recently shown that robotic guidance mixed with unassisted practice can significantly improve the learning of a golf putting task (Bested & Tremblay, 2018). To understand the mechanisms associated with this new mixed approach (i.e., unassisted and robot-guided practice) for the learning of a golf putting task, the current study aimed to determine if such mixed practice extends to one's ability to detect errors. Participants completed a pre-test, an acquisition phase, as well as immediate, delayed (24-h), and transfer post-tests. During the pre-test, kinematic data from the putter was converted into highly accurate, consistent, and smooth trajectories delivered by a robot arm. During acquisition, 2 groups performed putts towards 3 different targets with robotic guidance on either 0% or 50% of acquisition trials. Only the 50% guidance group significantly reduced ball endpoint distance and variability, as well as ball endpoint error estimations, between the pre-test and the post-tests (i.e., immediate retention, 24-h retention, and 24-h transfer). The current study showed that allowing one to experience both robotic guidance and unassisted (i.e., errorful) performances enhances one's ability to detect errors, which can explain the beneficial motor learning effects of a mixed practice schedule.

[1]  Luc Proteau,et al.  Observation learning of a motor task: who and when? , 2013, Experimental Brain Research.

[2]  D. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  The effect of haptic guidance, aging, and initial skill level on motor learning of a steering task , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[3]  Paul Milgram,et al.  A spectacle-mounted liquid-crystal tachistoscope , 1987 .

[4]  R. Riener,et al.  Learning a locomotor task: with or without errors? , 2014, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[5]  L Proteau,et al.  A Sensorimotor Basis for Motor Learning: Evidence Indicating Specificity of Practice , 1992, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[6]  Stephan P. Swinnen,et al.  Summary knowledge of results for skill acquisition: support for the guidance hypothesis , 1989 .

[7]  D Elliott,et al.  Specificity versus variability: effects of practice conditions on the use of afferent information for manual aiming. , 2001, Motor control.

[8]  C. Shea,et al.  Specificity and variability of practice. , 1990, Research quarterly for exercise and sport.

[9]  Daniël Lakens,et al.  Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs , 2013, Front. Psychol..

[10]  L Proteau,et al.  On the Cognitive Basis of Observational Learning: Development of Mechanisms for the Detection and Correction of Errors , 2000, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[11]  V. Nougier,et al.  Movement control in golf putting , 1997 .

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

[13]  Luc Proteau,et al.  Learning through observation: a combination of expert and novice models favors learning , 2011, Experimental Brain Research.

[14]  Andreas Kramer,et al.  Robotic guidance induces long-lasting changes in the movement pattern of a novel sport-specific motor task. , 2014, Human movement science.

[15]  Richard A. Schmidt,et al.  Frequent Augmented Feedback Can Degrade Learning: Evidence and Interpretations , 1991 .

[16]  Jin-Uk Kim,et al.  Differences between experts and novices in kinematics and accuracy of golf putting. , 2010, Human movement science.

[17]  Heather Carnahan,et al.  It Pays to Go Off-Track: Practicing with Error-Augmenting Haptic Feedback Facilitates Learning of a Curve-Tracing Task , 2016, Front. Psychol..

[18]  C H Shea,et al.  Composition of practice: influence on the retention of motor skills. , 1991, Research quarterly for exercise and sport.

[19]  John F. Kalaska,et al.  Neural correlates of mental rehearsal in dorsal premotor cortex , 2004, Nature.

[20]  Juliana Dushanova,et al.  Neurons in primary motor cortex engaged during action observation , 2010, The European journal of neuroscience.

[21]  Heather Carnahan,et al.  Learning Effects of Practice with Error-altering Haptic Feedback Depend on Bandwidth: Are there Implications for Rehabilitation Robots? , 2017 .

[22]  Gerome A Manson,et al.  Effects of robotic guidance on sensorimotor control: planning vs. online control? , 2014, NeuroRehabilitation.

[23]  G. Gescheider Psychophysics: The Fundamentals , 1997 .

[24]  J. Adams,et al.  A closed-loop theory of motor learning. , 1971, Journal of motor behavior.

[25]  R. Schmidt,et al.  Evidence for an error detection mechanism in motor skills. , 1972, Journal of motor behavior.

[26]  Luc Proteau,et al.  Mixed observation favors motor learning through better estimation of the model’s performance , 2014, Experimental Brain Research.

[27]  Luc Tremblay,et al.  Robotic guidance with variability of practice can improve the learning of a golf putting task , 2018 .

[28]  Ernest T. Goetz,et al.  Feedback and practice as variables in error detection and correction. , 1973, Journal of motor behavior.

[29]  G Wulf,et al.  Physical-guidance benefits in learning a complex motor skill. , 1998, Journal of motor behavior.

[30]  David J. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Haptic Guidance Can Enhance Motor Learning of a Steering Task , 2008, Journal of motor behavior.