Marchal-Crespo Laura, Rappo Nicole, Riener Robert
Sensory-Motor Systems (SMS) Lab, Department of Health Sciences and Technology (D-HEST), Institute of Robotics and Intelligent Systems (IRIS), ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Reharobotics Group, Medical Faculty, Balgrist University Hospital, Spinal Cord Injury Center, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Exp Brain Res. 2017 Dec;235(12):3799-3816. doi: 10.1007/s00221-017-5099-9. Epub 2017 Oct 5.
Previous research suggests that the effectiveness of robotic training depends on the motor task to be learned. However, it is still an open question which specific task's characteristics influence the efficacy of error-modulating training strategies. Motor tasks can be classified based on the time characteristics of the task, in particular the task's duration (discrete vs. continuous). Continuous tasks require movements without distinct beginning or end. Discrete tasks require fast movements that include well-defined postures at the beginning and the end. We developed two games, one that requires a continuous movement-a tracking task-and one that requires discrete movements-a fast reaching task. We conducted an experiment with thirty healthy subjects to evaluate the effectiveness of three error-modulating training strategies-no guidance, error amplification (i.e., repulsive forces proportional to errors) and haptic guidance-on self-reported motivation and learning of the continuous and discrete games. Training with error amplification resulted in better motor learning than haptic guidance, besides the fact that error amplification reduced subjects' interest/enjoyment and perceived competence during training. Only subjects trained with error amplification improved their performance after training the discrete game. In fact, subjects trained without guidance improved the performance in the continuous game significantly more than in the discrete game, probably because the continuous task required greater attentional levels. Error-amplifying training strategies have a great potential to provoke better motor learning in continuous and discrete tasks. However, their long-lasting negative effects on motivation might limit their applicability in intense neurorehabilitation programs.
先前的研究表明,机器人训练的有效性取决于要学习的运动任务。然而,具体是哪些任务特征会影响误差调节训练策略的效果,这仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。运动任务可以根据任务的时间特征进行分类,特别是任务的持续时间(离散型与连续型)。连续任务要求动作没有明显的开始或结束。离散任务要求快速动作,包括在开始和结束时姿势明确。我们开发了两款游戏,一款需要连续动作——追踪任务,另一款需要离散动作——快速伸手任务。我们对30名健康受试者进行了一项实验,以评估三种误差调节训练策略——无引导、误差放大(即与误差成正比的排斥力)和触觉引导——对连续和离散游戏的自我报告动机和学习效果的影响。与触觉引导相比,误差放大训练带来了更好的运动学习效果,尽管误差放大在训练过程中降低了受试者的兴趣/乐趣以及自我感知能力。只有接受误差放大训练的受试者在训练离散游戏后提高了他们的表现。事实上,无引导训练的受试者在连续游戏中的表现改善明显大于离散游戏,这可能是因为连续任务需要更高的注意力水平。误差放大训练策略在连续和离散任务中激发更好的运动学习方面具有巨大潜力。然而,它们对动机的长期负面影响可能会限制其在强化神经康复计划中的适用性。