Differential control of task and null space variability in response to changes in task difficulty when learning a bimanual steering task

The presence of motor redundancy means that movement variability can be split into a ‘task-space’ component that affects task performance, and a ‘null space’ component which has no effect on task performance. While the control of task-space variability during learning is essential, because it is directly linked to performance, how the nervous system controls null space variability during learning has not been well understood. One factor that has been hypothesized to govern the change in null space variability with learning is task difficulty, but this has not been directly tested. Here, we examined how task difficulty influences the change in null space variability with learning. Healthy, college-aged participants (N = 36) performed a bimanual steering task, where they steered a cursor through a smooth W-shaped track of a certain width as quickly as possible while attempting to keep the cursor within the track. Task difficulty was altered by changing the track width and participants were split into one of the three groups based on the track width that they practiced on—wide, narrow, or progressive (where the width of the track progressively changed from wide to narrow over practice). The redundancy in this task arose from the fact that the position of the cursor was defined as the average position of the two hands. Results showed that movement time depended on task difficulty, but all groups were able to decrease their movement time with practice. Learning was associated with a reduction in null space variability in all groups, but critically, there was no effect of task difficulty. Further analyses showed that while the task-space variability showed an expected speed–accuracy tradeoff with movement time, the null space variability showed a qualitatively different pattern. These results suggest differential control of task and null space variability in response to changes in task difficulty with learning, and may reflect a strong preference to minimize overall movement variability during learning.

[1]  R. Gagne,et al.  Transfer of training to a motor skill as a function of variation in rate of response. , 1950, Journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  Rajiv Ranganathan,et al.  High variability impairs motor learning regardless of whether it affects task performance , 2017 .

[3]  M. Latash,et al.  What do synergies do? Effects of secondary constraints on multidigit synergies in accurate force-production tasks. , 2008, Journal of neurophysiology.

[4]  E. Thorndike,et al.  The influence of improvement in one mental function upon the efficiency of other functions. (I). , 1901 .

[5]  J. Kelso The Bernstein Perspective: I. The Problems of Degrees of Freedom and Context-Conditioned Variability , 2014 .

[6]  Ferdinando A Mussa-Ivaldi,et al.  Remapping hand movements in a novel geometrical environment. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[7]  Rajiv Ranganathan,et al.  Learning to be Lazy: Exploiting Redundancy in a Novel Task to Minimize Movement-Related Effort , 2013, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

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

[10]  J. C. Bachman Specificity vs. Generality in Learning and Performing Two Large Muscle Motor Tasks , 1961 .

[11]  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.

[12]  P. Fitts The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[13]  M. Latash,et al.  Age-related changes in finger coordination in static prehension tasks. , 2004, Journal of applied physiology.

[14]  Gregor Schöner,et al.  Effect of accuracy constraint on joint coordination during pointing movements , 2003, Experimental Brain Research.

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

[16]  N. A. Bernshteĭn The co-ordination and regulation of movements , 1967 .

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

[18]  H. Zelaznik,et al.  Motor-output variability: a theory for the accuracy of rapid motor acts. , 1979, Psychological review.

[19]  Mark L. Latash,et al.  The bliss (not the problem) of motor abundance (not redundancy) , 2012, Experimental Brain Research.

[20]  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.

[21]  S. Jaric,et al.  Practice improves even the simplest movements , 1988, Experimental Brain Research.

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

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

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

[25]  Maura Casadio,et al.  Reorganization of finger coordination patterns during adaptation to rotation and scaling of a newly learned sensorimotor transformation. , 2011, Journal of neurophysiology.

[26]  M. Latash,et al.  An apparent contradiction: increasing variability to achieve greater precision? , 2013, Experimental Brain Research.

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

[28]  Day Rh,et al.  Relative task difficulty and transfer of training in skilled performance. , 1956 .

[29]  Daniel M. Wolpert,et al.  Making smooth moves , 2022 .

[30]  M. Turvey The bernstein perspective I , 1982 .

[31]  R. Day,et al.  Relative task difficulty and transfer of training in skilled performance. , 1956, Psychological bulletin.

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

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

[34]  Shumin Zhai,et al.  Beyond Fitts' law: models for trajectory-based HCI tasks , 1997, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[35]  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.

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

[37]  Xiaolin Liu,et al.  Contributions of online visual feedback to the learning and generalization of novel finger coordination patterns. , 2008, Journal of neurophysiology.

[38]  Raoul M. Bongers,et al.  Physical Demand but Not Dexterity Is Associated with Motor Flexibility during Rapid Reaching in Healthy Young Adults , 2015, PloS one.

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

[40]  Mark L. Latash,et al.  The Effects of Practice on Coordination , 2014, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

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