↓ Skip to main content

Online Visual Feedback during Error-Free Channel Trials Leads to Active Unlearning of Movement Dynamics: Evidence for Adaptation to Trajectory Prediction Errors

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Online Visual Feedback during Error-Free Channel Trials Leads to Active Unlearning of Movement Dynamics: Evidence for Adaptation to Trajectory Prediction Errors
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00472
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angel Lago-Rodriguez, R. Chris Miall

Abstract

Prolonged exposure to movement perturbations leads to creation of motor memories which decay towards previous states when the perturbations are removed. However, it remains unclear whether this decay is due only to a spontaneous and passive recovery of the previous state. It has recently been reported that activation of reinforcement-based learning mechanisms delays the onset of the decay. This raises the question whether other motor learning mechanisms may also contribute to the retention and/or decay of the motor memory. Therefore, we aimed to test whether mechanisms of error-based motor adaptation are active during the decay of the motor memory. Forty-five right-handed participants performed point-to-point reaching movements under an external dynamic perturbation. We measured the expression of the motor memory through error-clamped (EC) trials, in which lateral forces constrained movements to a straight line towards the target. We found greater and faster decay of the motor memory for participants who had access to full online visual feedback during these EC trials (Cursor group), when compared with participants who had no EC feedback regarding movement trajectory (Arc group). Importantly, we did not find between-group differences in adaptation to the external perturbation. In addition, we found greater decay of the motor memory when we artificially increased feedback errors through the manipulation of visual feedback (Augmented-Error group). Our results then support the notion of an active decay of the motor memory, suggesting that adaptive mechanisms are involved in correcting for the mismatch between predicted movement trajectories and actual sensory feedback, which leads to greater and faster decay of the motor memory.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Denmark 1 3%
Unknown 31 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 33%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 5 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 8 24%
Psychology 5 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Engineering 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 7 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,271,203
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,588
of 7,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,783
of 321,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#86
of 152 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,172 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 321,667 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 152 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.