Cargando…
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, perturbati...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6334820/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30640373 http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/19.1.5 |
_version_ | 1783387791631056896 |
---|---|
author | Gaffin-Cahn, Elon Hudson, Todd E Landy, Michael S |
author_facet | Gaffin-Cahn, Elon Hudson, Todd E Landy, Michael S |
author_sort | Gaffin-Cahn, Elon |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6334820 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63348202019-01-17 Did I do that? Detecting a perturbation to visual feedback in a reaching task Gaffin-Cahn, Elon Hudson, Todd E Landy, Michael S J Vis Article 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. The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 2019-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6334820/ /pubmed/30640373 http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/19.1.5 Text en Copyright 2019 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
spellingShingle | Article Gaffin-Cahn, Elon Hudson, Todd E Landy, Michael S Did I do that? Detecting a perturbation to visual feedback in a reaching task |
title | Did I do that? Detecting a perturbation to visual feedback in a reaching task |
title_full | Did I do that? Detecting a perturbation to visual feedback in a reaching task |
title_fullStr | Did I do that? Detecting a perturbation to visual feedback in a reaching task |
title_full_unstemmed | Did I do that? Detecting a perturbation to visual feedback in a reaching task |
title_short | Did I do that? Detecting a perturbation to visual feedback in a reaching task |
title_sort | did i do that? detecting a perturbation to visual feedback in a reaching task |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6334820/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30640373 http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/19.1.5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gaffincahnelon dididothatdetectingaperturbationtovisualfeedbackinareachingtask AT hudsontodde dididothatdetectingaperturbationtovisualfeedbackinareachingtask AT landymichaels dididothatdetectingaperturbationtovisualfeedbackinareachingtask |