Did I do that? Detecting a perturbation to visual feedback in a reaching task

The motor system executes actions in a highly stereotyped manner despite the high number of degrees of freedom available. Studies of motor adaptation leverage this fact by disrupting, or perturbing, visual feedback to measure how the motor system compensates. To elicit detectable effects, perturbations are often large compared to trial-to-trial reach endpoint variability. However, awareness of large perturbations can elicit qualitatively different compensation processes than unnoticeable ones can. The current experiment measures the perturbation detection threshold, and investigates how humans combine proprioception and vision to decide whether displayed reach endpoint errors are self-generated only, or are due to experimenter-imposed perturbation. We scaled or rotated the position of the visual feedback of center-out reaches to targets and asked subjects to indicate whether visual feedback was perturbed. Subjects detected perturbations when they were at least 1.5 times the standard deviation of trial-to-trial endpoint variability. In contrast to previous studies, subjects suboptimally combined vision and proprioception. Instead of using proprioceptive input, they responded based on the final (possibly perturbed) visual feedback. These results inform methodology in motor system experimentation, and more broadly highlight the ability to attribute errors to one's own motor output and combine visual and proprioceptive feedback to make decisions.

[1]  Robert H Wurtz,et al.  Saccadic Corollary Discharge Underlies Stable Visual Perception , 2016, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[2]  R. J. van Beers,et al.  Integration of proprioceptive and visual position-information: An experimentally supported model. , 1999, Journal of neurophysiology.

[3]  R C Miall,et al.  System Identification Applied to a Visuomotor Task: Near-Optimal Human Performance in a Noisy Changing Task , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[4]  P. Celnik,et al.  Dissociating the roles of the cerebellum and motor cortex during adaptive learning: the motor cortex retains what the cerebellum learns. , 2011, Cerebral cortex.

[5]  I ROCK,et al.  Vision and Touch: An Experimentally Created Conflict between the Two Senses , 1964, Science.

[6]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Estimating the sources of motor errors for adaptation and generalization , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[7]  C. S. Harris,et al.  Beware of the Straight-Ahead Shift—A Nonperceptual Change in Experiments on Adaptation to Displaced Vision , 1974, Perception.

[8]  Philip N. Sabes,et al.  Multisensory Integration during Motor Planning , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[9]  H. Akaike.  A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[10]  Shih-Wei Wu,et al.  Limits to human movement planning in tasks with asymmetric gain landscapes. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[11]  James L. Patton,et al.  Simultaneous coordinate representations are influenced by visual feedback in a motor learning task , 2011, 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[12]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[13]  Eli Brenner,et al.  Vector and position coding in goal-directed movements , 2016, Experimental Brain Research.

[14]  Michael S. Landy,et al.  Sinusoidal error perturbation reveals multiple coordinate systems for sensorymotor adaptation , 2016, Vision Research.

[15]  James R. Lackner,et al.  Rapid adaptation of torso pointing movements to perturbations of the base of support , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[16]  R. J. Beers,et al.  Motor Learning Is Optimally Tuned to the Properties of Motor Noise , 2009, Neuron.

[17]  G. Torres-Oviedo,et al.  Natural error patterns enable transfer of motor learning to novel contexts. , 2012, Journal of neurophysiology.

[18]  Reza Shadmehr,et al.  Dissociable effects of the implicit and explicit memory systems on learning control of reaching , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[19]  Michael E Hahn,et al.  Effects of Gradual Versus Sudden Training on the Cognitive Demand Required While Learning a Novel Locomotor Task , 2013, Journal of motor behavior.

[20]  Hank Heijink,et al.  Different learned coordinate frames for planning trajectories and final positions in reaching. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[21]  C. Bard,et al.  Contribution of proprioception for calibrating and updating the motor space. , 1995, Canadian journal of physiology and pharmacology.

[22]  D. Wolpert,et al.  When Feeling Is More Important Than Seeing in Sensorimotor Adaptation , 2002, Current Biology.

[23]  Heiner Deubel,et al.  Post-saccadic location judgments reveal remapping of saccade targets to non-foveal locations. , 2009, Journal of vision.

[24]  J. Cole,et al.  Proprioception in motor learning: lessons from a deafferented subject , 2015, Experimental Brain Research.

[25]  R. Ivry,et al.  An Explicit Strategy Prevails When the Cerebellum Fails to Compute Movement Errors , 2010, The Cerebellum.

[26]  M. Goodale,et al.  Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand , 1995, Current Biology.

[27]  Martin Rolfs,et al.  Saccadic adaptation to a systematically varying disturbance. , 2016, Journal of neurophysiology.

[28]  David M. Huberdeau,et al.  Dual-process decomposition in human sensorimotor adaptation , 2015, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[29]  Jörn Diedrichsen,et al.  Reach adaptation: what determines whether we learn an internal model of the tool or adapt the model of our arm? , 2008, Journal of neurophysiology.

[30]  G. Stelmach,et al.  Adaptation to gradual as compared with sudden visuo-motor distortions , 1997, Experimental Brain Research.

[31]  Michael S Landy,et al.  Adaptation to sensory-motor reflex perturbations is blind to the source of errors. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[32]  J. Sanes,et al.  Effects of perturbations on accuracy of arm movements , 1983, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[33]  O. Donchin,et al.  Awareness of Sensorimotor Adaptation to Visual Rotations of Different Size , 2015, PloS one.

[34]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Explicit and Implicit Contributions to Learning in a Sensorimotor Adaptation Task , 2014, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

[36]  J. Krakauer,et al.  An Implicit Plan Overrides an Explicit Strategy during Visuomotor Adaptation , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[37]  Philip N. Sabes,et al.  Flexible strategies for sensory integration during motor planning , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[38]  R. Held,et al.  PLASTICITY IN HUMAN SENSORIMOTOR CONTROL. , 1963, Science.

[39]  C. Prablanc,et al.  Large adjustments in visually guided reaching do not depend on vision of the hand or perception of target displacement , 1986, Nature.

[40]  Aaron L. Wong,et al.  Saccade adaptation improves in response to a gradually introduced stimulus perturbation , 2011, Neuroscience Letters.

[41]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[42]  M. Hautus.  Corrections for extreme proportions and their biasing effects on estimated values ofd′ , 1995 .

[43]  Michael S. Landy,et al.  Measuring adaptation with a sinusoidal perturbation function , 2012, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[44]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Relevance of error: what drives motor adaptation? , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[45]  Joaquin A. Anguera,et al.  A spatial explicit strategy reduces error but interferes with sensorimotor adaptation. , 2011, Journal of neurophysiology.

[46]  L. Jacoby.  A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory , 1991 .

[47]  Marc O. Ernst,et al.  Knowing Each Random Error of Our Ways, but Hardly Correcting for It: An Instance of Optimal Performance , 2013, PloS one.

[48]  R. Miall,et al.  The role of proprioception and attention in a visuomotor adaptation task , 2000, Experimental Brain Research.

[49]  J. Douglas Crawford,et al.  Optimal transsaccadic integration explains distorted spatial perception , 2003, Nature.