School of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa, 125 University Private, Room 360, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada.
School of Kinesiology, University of British Columbia, 6108 Thunderbird Boulevard, Osborne Centre Unit 2, Room 205, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z1, Canada.
Exp Brain Res. 2019 Jun;237(6):1431-1444. doi: 10.1007/s00221-019-05515-0. Epub 2019 Mar 20.
Human movements are remarkably adaptive. We are capable of completing movements in a novel visuomotor environment with similar accuracy to those performed in a typical environment. In the current study, we examined if the control processes underlying movements under typical conditions were different from those underlying novel visuomotor conditions. 16 participants were divided into two groups, one receiving continuous visual feedback during all reaches (CF), and the other receiving terminal feedback regarding movement endpoint (TF). Participants trained in a virtual environment by completing 150 reaches to three targets when (1) a cursor accurately represented their hand motion (i.e., typical environment) and (2) a cursor was rotated 45° clockwise relative to their hand motion (i.e., novel environment). Analyses of within-trial measures across 150 reaching trials revealed that participants were able to demonstrate similar movement outcomes (i.e., movement time and angular errors) regardless of visual feedback or reaching environment by the end of reach training. Furthermore, a reduction in variability across several measures (i.e., reaction time, movement time, time after peak velocity, and jerk score) over time showed that participants improved the consistency of their movements in both reaching environments. However, participants took more time and were less consistent in the timing of initiating their movements when reaching in a novel environment compared to reaching in a typical environment, even at the end of training. As well, angular error variability at different proportions of the movement trajectory was consistently greater when reaching in a novel environment across trials and within a trial. Together, the results suggest a greater contribution of offline control processes and less effective online corrective processes when reaching in a novel environment compared to when reaching in a typical environment.
人类的动作具有很强的适应性。我们能够在类似典型环境的新颖视觉运动环境中以相似的精度完成动作。在当前的研究中,我们考察了在典型条件下运动的控制过程是否与新颖视觉运动条件下的控制过程不同。16 名参与者被分为两组,一组在所有动作中都接受连续的视觉反馈(CF),另一组仅在动作终点接受视觉反馈(TF)。参与者在虚拟环境中通过完成 150 次到达三个目标的动作来进行训练,其中(1)光标准确地表示手的运动(即典型环境)和(2)光标相对于手的运动顺时针旋转 45°(即新颖环境)。在 150 次到达试验中,对各项指标进行了分析,结果表明,无论视觉反馈或到达环境如何,参与者最终都能够表现出相似的运动结果(即运动时间和角度误差)。此外,随着时间的推移,多个指标(即反应时间、运动时间、峰值速度后的时间和急动度得分)的变异性降低表明,参与者在两种到达环境中都提高了运动的一致性。然而,与在典型环境中到达相比,参与者在新颖环境中到达时需要更多的时间,并且在运动开始时的时间一致性较差,即使在训练结束时也是如此。同样,在整个试验和试验内,在新颖环境中到达时,运动轨迹不同比例处的角度误差变异性始终较大。总之,结果表明,与在典型环境中到达相比,在新颖环境中到达时,离线控制过程的贡献更大,而在线校正过程的效果较差。