Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Performance differences in visually and internally guided continuous manual tracking movements

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Experimental Brain Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Control of familiar visually guided movements involves internal plans as well as visual and other online sensory information, though how visual and internal plans combine for reaching movements remain unclear. Traditional motor sequence learning tasks, such as the serial reaction time task, use stereotyped movements and measure only reaction time. Here, we used a continuous sequential reaching task comprised of naturalistic movements, in order to provide detailed kinematic performance measures. When we embedded pre-learned trajectories (those presumably having an internal plan) within similar but unpredictable movement sequences, participants performed the two kinds of movements with remarkable similarity, and position error alone could not reliably identify the epoch. For such embedded movements, performance during pre-learned sequences showed statistically significant but trivial decreases in measures of kinematic error, compared to performance during novel sequences. However, different sets of kinematic error variables changed significantly between learned and novel sequences for individual participants, suggesting that each participant used distinct motor strategies favoring different kinematic variables during each of the two movement types. Algorithms that incorporated multiple kinematic variables identified transitions between the two movement types well but imperfectly. Hidden Markov model classification differentiated learned and novel movements on single trials based on the above kinematic error variables with 82 ± 5% accuracy within 244 ± 696 ms, despite the limited extent of changes in those errors. These results suggest that the motor system can achieve markedly similar performance whether or not an internal plan is present, as only subtle changes arise from any difference between the neural substrates involved in those two conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ariff G, Donchin O, Nanayakkara T, Shadmehr R (2002) A real-time state predictor in motor control: study of saccadic eye movements during unseen reaching. J Neurosci 22:7721–7729

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ashe J, Lungu OV, Basford AT, Lu X (2006) Cortical control of motor sequences. Curr Opin Neurobiol 16:213–221

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bapi RS, Doya K, Harner AM (2000) Evidence for effector independent and dependent representations and their differential time course of acquisition during motor sequence learning. Exp Brain Res 132:149–162

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bapi RS, Kiyapuram KP, Graydon FX, Doya K (2006) fMRI investigation of cortical and subcortical networks in the learning of abstract and effector-specific representations of motor sequences. NeuroImage 32:714–727

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bhat R, Sanes JN (1998) Cognitive channels computing action distance and direction. J Neurosci 18:7556–7580

    Google Scholar 

  • Diedrichsen J, Hashambhoy Y, Rane T, Shadmehr R (2005) Neural correlates of reach errors. J Neurosci 25:9919–9931

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duhamel J-R, Colby CL, Goldberg ME (1992) The updating of the representation of visual space in parietal cortex by intended eye movements. Science 255:90–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Geman S, Kochanek K (2001) Dynamic programming and the graphical representation of error-correcting codes. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 47:549–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grafton ST, Hazeltine E, Ivry RB (1998) Abstract and effector-specific representations of motor sequences identified with PET. J Neurosci 18:9420–9428

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hikosaka O, MK R, Miyachi S, Miyashita K (1995) Learning of sequential movements in the monkey: process of learning and retention of memory. J Neurophys 74:1652–1661

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karni A, Meyer G, Jezzard P, Adams M, Turner R, Ungerleider LG (1995) Functional MRI evidence for adult motor cortex plasticity during motor skill learning. Nature 377:155–158

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Klein Breteler MD, Hondzinski JM, Flanders M (2003) Drawing sequences of segments in 3D: kinetic influences on arm configuration. J Neurophysiol 89:3253–3263

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lungu OV, Wächter T, Liu T, Willingham DT, Ashe J (2004) Probability detection mechanisms and motor learning. Exp Brain Res 159:135–150

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miall RC, Jackson JK (2006) Adaptation to visual feedback delays in manual tracking: evidence against the Smith Predictor model of human visually guided action. Exp Brain Res 172:77–84

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moran DW, Schwartz AB (1999) Motor cortical representation of speed and direction during reaching. J Neurophysiol 82:2676–2692

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Morasso P (1981) Spatial control of arm movements. Exp Brain Res 42:223–227

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nissen MJ, Bullemer P (1987) Attentional requirements of learning: evidence from performance measures. Cogn Psych 19:1–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paninski L, Fellows MR, Hatsopoulos NG (2004) Spatiotemporal tuning of motor cortical neurons for hand position and velocity. J Neurophysiol 91:515–532

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Poldrack RA, Sabb FW, Foerde K, Tom SM, Asarnow RF, Bookheimer SY, Knowlton BJ (2005) The neural correlates of motor skill automaticity. J Neurosci 25:5356–5364

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Press SJ (1989) Bayesian statistics: principles models and applications. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabiner LR (1989) A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition. Proc IEEE 77:257–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson EM (2007) The serial reaction time task: implicit motor skill learning? J Neurosci 27:10073–10075

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sakai K, Hikosaka O, Miyauchi S, Takino R, Sasaki Y, Pütz B (1998) Transition of brain activation from frontal to parietal areas in visuomotor sequence learning. J Neurosci 18:1827–1840

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shadmehr R, Mussa-Ivaldi FA (1994) Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task. J Neurosci 14:3208–3224

    Google Scholar 

  • Shadmehr R, Wise SP (2005) The computational biology of reaching and pointing: a foundation for motor learning. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang T, Dordevic GS, Shadmehr R (2001) Learning the dynamics of reaching movements results in the modification of arm impedance and long-latency perturbation responses. Biol Cybern 85:437–448

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang W, Chan SS, Heldman DA, Moran DW (2007) Motor cortical representation of position and velocity during reaching. J Neurophysiol 97:4258–4270

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wessberg J, Perfiliev S, Fridlund M (2006) Continuous arm guidance by a visual target during high-speed tracking. Program No. 440.11. 2006 Neuroscience Meeting Planner. Society for Neuroscience, Atlanta, GA (online)

  • Willingham DB, Salidis J, Gabrieli JDE (2002) Direct comparison of neural systems mediating conscious and unconscious skill learning. J Neurophysiol 88:1451–1460

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

John P. Donoghue: NIH-NINDS NS-25074 (Javits). Jerome N. Sanes: NIH-NINDS R01NS44834.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin A. Philip.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Philip, B.A., Wu, Y., Donoghue, J.P. et al. Performance differences in visually and internally guided continuous manual tracking movements. Exp Brain Res 190, 475–491 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-008-1489-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-008-1489-3

Keywords

Navigation