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 is 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). Here 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 towards 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 to groups that had low variability during learning. These results suggest that although introducing variability can increase exploration of new solutions, this may come at a cost of decreased stability of the learned solution.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[8]  Eli Brenner,et al.  Random Walk of Motor Planning , 2012 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

[15]  S. E. Moxley,et al.  Schema: the variability of practice hypothesis. , 1979, Journal of motor behavior.

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

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

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

[19]  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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[27]  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.

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

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

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

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

[32]  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.

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

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

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

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

[37]  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.

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

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

[40]  E. Thelen Motor development: A new synthesis. , 1995 .

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

[42]  Steven A. Jax,et al.  Hand path priming in manual obstacle avoidance: evidence for abstract spatiotemporal forms in human motor control. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[43]  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.

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