Leow Li-Ann, Gunn Reece, Marinovic Welber, Carroll Timothy J
Centre for Sensorimotor Performance, School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, Building 26B, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia; and
Centre for Sensorimotor Performance, School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, Building 26B, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia; and.
J Neurophysiol. 2017 Aug 1;118(2):666-676. doi: 10.1152/jn.00834.2016. Epub 2017 Mar 29.
When sensory feedback is perturbed, accurate movement is restored by a combination of implicit processes and deliberate reaiming to strategically compensate for errors. Here, we directly compare two methods used previously to dissociate implicit from explicit learning on a trial-by-trial basis: ) asking participants to report the direction that they aim their movements, and contrasting this with the directions of the target and the movement that they actually produce, and ) manipulating movement preparation time. By instructing participants to reaim without a sensory perturbation, we show that reaiming is possible even with the shortest possible preparation times, particularly when targets are narrowly distributed. Nonetheless, reaiming is effortful and comes at the cost of increased variability, so we tested whether constraining preparation time is sufficient to suppress strategic reaiming during adaptation to visuomotor rotation with a broad target distribution. The rate and extent of error reduction under preparation time constraints were similar to estimates of implicit learning obtained from self-report without time pressure, suggesting that participants chose not to apply a reaiming strategy to correct visual errors under time pressure. Surprisingly, participants who reported aiming directions showed less implicit learning according to an alternative measure, obtained during trials performed without visual feedback. This suggests that the process of reporting can affect the extent or persistence of implicit learning. The data extend existing evidence that restricting preparation time can suppress explicit reaiming and provide an estimate of implicit visuomotor rotation learning that does not require participants to report their aiming directions. During sensorimotor adaptation, implicit error-driven learning can be isolated from explicit strategy-driven reaiming by subtracting self-reported aiming directions from movement directions, or by restricting movement preparation time. Here, we compared the two methods. Restricting preparation times did not eliminate reaiming but was sufficient to suppress reaiming during adaptation with widely distributed targets. The self-report method produced a discrepancy in implicit learning estimated by subtracting aiming directions and implicit learning measured in no-feedback trials.
当感觉反馈受到干扰时,通过隐式过程和有意识地重新瞄准以策略性地补偿误差的组合来恢复准确的运动。在这里,我们直接比较了之前在逐个试验基础上用于区分隐式学习和显式学习的两种方法:)要求参与者报告他们运动的目标方向,并将其与目标方向以及他们实际产生的运动方向进行对比;)操纵运动准备时间。通过指示参与者在没有感觉干扰的情况下重新瞄准,我们表明即使在尽可能短的准备时间内重新瞄准也是可能的,特别是当目标分布狭窄时。尽管如此,重新瞄准是费力的,并且是以增加变异性为代价的,因此我们测试了在适应具有广泛目标分布的视觉运动旋转时,限制准备时间是否足以抑制策略性重新瞄准。在准备时间限制下误差减少的速率和程度与在没有时间压力的情况下从自我报告中获得的隐式学习估计值相似,这表明参与者在时间压力下选择不应用重新瞄准策略来纠正视觉误差。令人惊讶的是,根据在没有视觉反馈的试验中获得的另一种测量方法,报告目标方向的参与者显示出较少的隐式学习。这表明报告过程可能会影响隐式学习的程度或持续性。这些数据扩展了现有证据,即限制准备时间可以抑制显式重新瞄准,并提供了一种无需参与者报告其目标方向的隐式视觉运动旋转学习的估计。在感觉运动适应过程中,可以通过从运动方向中减去自我报告的目标方向,或者通过限制运动准备时间,将隐式误差驱动学习与显式策略驱动的重新瞄准区分开来。在这里,我们比较了这两种方法。限制准备时间并没有消除重新瞄准,但足以在适应广泛分布的目标时抑制重新瞄准。自我报告方法在通过减去目标方向估计的隐式学习和在无反馈试验中测量的隐式学习之间产生了差异。