↓ Skip to main content

Savings for visuomotor adaptation require prior history of error, not prior repetition of successful actions

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurophysiology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Savings for visuomotor adaptation require prior history of error, not prior repetition of successful actions
Published in
Journal of Neurophysiology, July 2016
DOI 10.1152/jn.01055.2015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Li-Ann Leow, Aymar de Rugy, Welber Marinovic, Stephan Riek, Timothy J Carroll

Abstract

When we move, perturbations to our body or the environment can elicit discrepancies between predicted and actual outcomes. We readily adapt movements to compensate for such discrepancies. The retention of this learning is evident as savings; or faster re-adaptation to a previously encountered perturbation. The mechanistic processes contributing to savings, or even the necessary conditions for savings, is not fully understood. One theory suggests that savings requires increased sensitivity to previously experienced errors: when perturbations evoke a sequence of correlated errors, we increase our sensitivity to the errors experienced, which subsequently improves error correction (Herzfeld et al. 2014). An alternative theory suggests that savings requires a memory of actions: when an action becomes associated with success through repetition, that action is more rapidly retrieved at subsequent learning (Huang et al. 2011). Here, to better understand the necessary conditions for savings, we tested how savings is affected by prior experience of similar errors and prior repetition of the action required to eliminate errors. Prior experience of errors induced by a visuomotor rotation in the savings block was either prevented at initial learning by gradually removing an oppositely signed perturbation, or enforced by abruptly removing the perturbation. Prior repetition of the action required to eliminate errors in the savings block was deprived or enforced by manipulating target location in preceding trials. The data suggest that prior experience of errors is both necessary and sufficient for savings, whereas prior repetition of a successful action is neither necessary nor sufficient for savings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 102 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 33%
Student > Master 14 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 13%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 15 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 28 27%
Psychology 14 13%
Engineering 12 11%
Sports and Recreations 6 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 6%
Other 21 20%
Unknown 18 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 February 2020.
All research outputs
#5,211,074
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurophysiology
#1,235
of 8,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,929
of 370,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurophysiology
#20
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,423 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 370,390 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.