ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2022
Can moving in a redundant workspace accelerate motor adaptation?
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implicit sensorimotor learning in ballistic movement for transporting an object to a target.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Generalization inFrontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
- Reinforcement-based processes actively regulate motor exploration along redundant solution manifolds.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Parietal stimulation reverses age-related decline in exploration, learning, and decision-making.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Variability in behavior can be a manifestation of unwanted noise. However, variability can also reflect exploration and benefit learning. For example, it has been shown that interindividual differences in motor learning can be partly explained by differences in movement variability at baseline. Here, we examined whether permitting versus constraining movement variability via target shape alters motor learning rate in one and the same individual. Healthy young subjects made reaching movements to visual targets in two-dimensional space with their unseen hand. During an initial priming phase, the shape of targets allowed for movement variability either in direction (arc-shaped targets), or, in a separate session, in extent (radially oriented line-shaped targets), while requiring highly precise movements in the other spatial dimension, respectively. In subsequent test phases in each session, we quantified the rate of (single-trial) motor adaptation to visuomotor perturbations along these two spatial dimensions (rotation and gain). During priming, we observed higher variability in movement direction for arc-shaped targets, compared with radial line-shaped targets, and vice versa for variability in movement extent. As predicted, participants adapted more to a visuomotor rotation following priming with arc-shaped targets, compared with radial line-shaped targets, and vice versa for adaptation to a change in visuomotor gain. This effect was prominent in the part of the examined workspace where variability in initial movement trajectories was highest, suggesting high planning noise. Our results suggest that workspace redundancy can modulate motor adaptation in a spatially specific manner, however, this modulation may depend on the level of planning noise.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.