Conditioned adaptation to prismatic displacement

Adaptation to prismatic displacement was conditioned to the wearing of a pair of goggles in 240 min of training by employing Taylor’s alternation training technique. The alternation was between training exposures with both the prism and the goggles presented to S and with both absent. After the training, both the pointing to a visual target test and the pointing straight ahead test measured more adaptation and more aftereffects of adaptation when the goggles were     

Conditioned adaptation to prismatic displacement with a tone as the conditional stimulus

Adaptation to prismatic displacement was conditioned to a tone in 72 min of training by employing Taylor’s alternation training technique. The alternation consisted of two training conditions. In one, S was exposed to the prism and tone; in the other, S was exposed to neither. After training, the pointing to a visual target test measured more aftereffects of adaptation when the tone was present than when it was absent. Conditioning was obtained in two testing situations: (1) with the training goggles still worn by S, and (2) with the goggles removed.     

Adaptation to prism-displaced vision: The importance of target-pointing

Two experiments investigated the hypothesis that the experience of manually pointing at visual targets enhances motoric adaptation to prism-displaced vision. Experiment 1 indicated that when adaptation was measured by means of redirected pointing behavior (negative aftereffect) it varied directly with the specificity of the target, the least adaptation occurring when no target was available. This relationship was not observed when adaptation was measured in terms of a shift in the felt position of the prism-exposed hand (proprioceptive shift). Experiment 2 demonstrated that after double the prism-exposure trials used in Experiment 1, target-pointing experience continued to enhance adaptation (as indexed by both types of adaptation measure). In both experiments negative aftereffect was significantly larger than proprioceptive shift for all experimental conditions and the two measures were not correlated. These latter two findings cast doubt on Harris’s notion that negative aftereffect is entirely the result of altered position sense.     

Factors affecting proprioceptive adaptation to prismatic displacement

Two prism displacement experiments were conducted to determine the effects of reducing proprioceptive feedback on resultant adaptation magnitude. In Experiment 1, proprioceptive reduction was produced by requesting subjects to employ passive Ivs. active) and/or fast- Ivs. slow-) paced arm movement during prism exposure. When both of these conditions were present, a significant reduction in the magnitude of proprioceptive adaptation and a significant increase in the magnitude of visual adaptation were produced. In Experiment 2, hypnotic anesthesia was employed to reduce felt sensation in an adapting limb during a prism displacement situation. This manipulation reduced proprioceptive adaptation to a nonsignificant level. The combined results of the two experiments reveal several conditions that can serve to reduce proprioceptive adaptation during prism displacement.     

An examination of the relationship between visual capture and prism adaptation

The phenomena of prismatically induced “visual capture” and adaptation of the hand were compared. In Experiment 1, it was demonstrated that when the subject’s hand was transported for him by the experimenter (passive movement) immediately preceding the measure of visual capture, the magnitude of the immediate shift in felt limb position (visual capture) was enhanced relative to when the subject moved the hand himself (active movement). In Experiment 2, where the dependent measure was adaptation of the prism-exposed hand, the opposite effect was produced by the active/passive manipulation. It appears, then, that different processes operate to produce visual capture and adaptation. It was speculated that visual capture represents an immediate weighting of visual over proprioceptive input as a result of the greater precision of vision and/or the subject’s tendency to direct his attention more heavily to this modality. In contrast, prism adaptation is probably a recalibration of felt limb position in the direction of vision, induced by the presence of a registered discordance between visual and proprioceptive inputs.     

The effect of experienced limb identity upon adaptation to simulated displacement of the visual field

Ss were confronted with a situation which mimicked the visuomotor consequences of an 11-deg lateral displacement of the visual field (leftward in Experiment I and rightward in Experiment II). The displacement was effected by having E place his own finger to one side of S’s nonvisible finger. Ss who were informed of this deception prior to the exposure period (informed group) manifested significantly less adaptation (“negative aftereffect” and “proprioceptive shift”) than did Ss who were told that their vision would be displaced by the goggles which they were wearing (misinformed group). It was concluded that adaptation to visual rearrangement is strongly influenced by S’s assumptions regarding the adequacy of his vision and the identity of the manual limb which he is viewing.     

Calibration and Alignment are Separable: Evidence From Prism Adaptation

In 2 prism adaptation experiments, the authors investigated the effects of limb starting position visibility (visible or not visible) and visual feedback availability (early or late in target pointing movements). Thirty-two students participated in Experiment 1 and 24 students participated in Experiment 2. Independent of visual feedback availability, constant error was larger and variable error was smaller for target pointing when limb starting position was visible during prism exposure. Independent of limb starting position visibility, aftereffects of prism exposure were determined by visual feedback availability. Those results support the hypothesis that calibration is determined by limb starting position visibility, whereas alignment is determined separately by visual feedback availability.     

Generalization of prism adaptation

Prism exposure produces 2 kinds of adaptive response. Recalibration is ordinary strategic remapping of spatially coded movement commands to rapidly reduce performance error. Realignment is the extraordinary process of transforming spatial maps to bring the origins of coordinate systems into correspondence. Realignment occurs when spatial discordance signals noncorrespondence between spatial maps. In Experiment 1, generalization of recalibration aftereffects from prism exposure to postexposure depended upon the similarity of target pointing limb postures. Realignment aftereffects generalized to the spatial maps involved in exposure. In Experiment 2, the 2 kinds of aftereffects were measured for 3 test positions, one of which was the exposure training position. Recalibration aftereffects generalized nonlinearly, while realignment aftereffects generalized linearly, replicating Bedford (1989, 1993a) using a more familiar prism adaptation paradigm. Recalibration and realignment require methods for distinguishing their relative contribution to prism adaptation.     

The utilization of visual feedback information during rapid pointing movements

Three experiments were conducted to determine how variables other than movement time influence the speed of visual feedback utilization in a target-pointing task. In Experiment 1, subjects moved a stylus to a target 20 cm away with movement times of approximately 225 msec. Visual feedback was manipulated by leaving the room lights on over the whole course of the movement or extinguishing the lights upon movement initiation, while prior knowledge about feedback availability was manipulated by blocking or randomizing feedback. Subjects exhibited less radial error in the lights-on/blocked condition than in the other three conditions. In Experiment 2, when subjects were forced to use vision by a laterally displacing prism, it was found that they benefited from the presence of visual feedback regardless of feedback uncertainty even when moving very rapidly (e.g. less than 190 msec). In Experiment 3, subjects pointed with and without a prism over a wide variety of movement times. Subjects benefited from vision much earlier in the prism condition. Subjects seem able to use vision rapidly to modify aiming movements but may do so only when the visual information is predictably available and/or yields an error large enough to detect early enough to correct.     

Prism adaptation: The “target-pointing effect” as a function of exposure trials

The amount by which target pointing enhances prism adaptation (the “target-pointing effect”) was examined as a function of exposure trials. Each S served in three conditions—target-pointing, no-target, and control—wearing 20-diopter prism goggles in the first two. The S was measured prior to the exposure period on target-pointing accuracy with normal vision but with no visual feedback regarding his performance. Similar measures were taken after the 5th, 10th, 15th, 25th, 35th, 55th, and 95th exposure trials and after each of two consecutive 5-min postexposure periods in the dark. The two experimental conditions led to sharply rising and negatively accelerated adaptation (“negative aftereffect”) curves, the asymptotes of which differed markedly, in favor of the target-pointing condition. This difference in asymptotes indicates that the target-pointing effect is not limited to the early portion of the exposure period but, instead, is a relatively permanent phenomenon. There was no decline in adaptation during the postexposure period.     

Arm-body adaptation with passive arm movements

Two experiments investigated the aftereffects of pointing with passive movements during exposure to 15-deg laterally displacing wedge pnsms. Experiment 1 compared exposure with passive and active supported movements when the aftereffects were measured with the arm still in the passive movement device. Following passive exposure and active supported exposure, 5.6 and 7.9 deg, respectively, of arm-body adaptation were measured. In Experiment 2, the passive and active supported exposure tasks were compared with a third task in which similar movements were made with the arm fully supported by the muscles. Aftereffects were measured with active test movements. The amount of arm-body adaptation measured following passive exposure was decreased to 2.8 deg, and following active supported exposure it was decreased to 2.8 deg, while following exposure with normal active movements, 5.3 deg of arm-body adaptation was found. The results suggest that when the arm remains outstretched during prism exposure, adaptation is specific to this extended posture.     

Prism adaptation in schizophrenia

The prism adaptation test examines procedural learning (PL) in which performance facilitation occurs with practice on tasks without the need for conscious awareness. Dynamic interactions between frontostriatal cortices, basal ganglia, and the cerebellum have been shown to play key roles in PL. Disruptions within these neural networks have also been implicated in schizophrenia, and such disruptions may manifest as impairment in prism adaptation test performance in schizophrenia patients. This study examined prism adaptation in a sample of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia (N=91) and healthy normal controls (N=58). Quantitative indices of performance during prism adaptation conditions with and without visual feedback were studied. Schizophrenia patients were significantly more impaired in adapting to prism distortion and demonstrated poorer quality of PL. Patients did not differ from healthy controls on aftereffects when the prisms were removed, but they had significantly greater difficulties in reorientation. Deficits in prism adaptation among schizophrenia patients may be due to abnormalities in motor programming arising from the disruptions within the neural networks that subserve PL.     

特征关联的类别间面孔适应

研究通过系列实验探讨了面孔适应不仅仅发生在形状选择性上, 也能发生在任务相关的特征上有内在关联的两个不同类别的物体间。实验1以带有明显性别倾向的物品图片作为适应刺激, 让被试对男女之间morphing程度不同的图片面孔进行性别辨别, 考察了不同适应刺激呈现时间的类别间面孔适应。结果表明适应刺激呈现时间大于50 ms时均存在类别间面孔适应效应。实验2评估了“性别”这一特征以及适应刺激形式在类别间面孔适应中所起的作用, 结果发现带有性别倾向的物品图片、相应的物品名称和性别文字(“男性”、“女性”) 3种适应刺激类型均能产生类别间适应。实验3通过操纵适应刺激上的注意负荷(高负荷、低负荷和无负荷), 探究了注意对类别间面孔适应的影响。结果表明随着注意负荷的增加, 类别间面孔适应效应减小。3个实验报告了一个新异的类别间适应后效, 证明了适应也能发生于在任务相关特征上有内在关联的两个不同类别的物体间。     

Target and arm observation effects on adaptation to prism displacement

Adaptation to displacement of objects in the visual field was studied as a function of preexposure test targets being absent or present in that field and lateral arm movement requiring no pointing at targets being observed or unobservable during prism exposure. Significantly greater adaptation was found when targets present during prism exposure were the same as those present during pre and postexposure test conditions. In addition, greater adaptation was found when S was permitted observation of lateral arm movement during prism exposure. Greatest adaptation was produced when both targets were present and arm movement was observable during prism exposure. In addition, when three targets were present during prism exposure, the greatest amount of adaptation was found for targets on S’s prismatically shifted visual field periphery.     

Driving at night with a cataract: Risk homeostasis?

Driving with a cataract can be dangerous, especially at night when road lighting and automotive lighting produce glare. Disability glare alters visual performance, while discomfort glare contributes to restricted mobility, with drivers avoiding driving at night. The present study was focused on the visual effects of an early cataract, and aimed at comparing three driving performance indexes at night, under glare conditions, with and without a simulated cataract. Two indexes directly referred to road safety, while a measure could be related to behavioral adaptation.Using a driving simulator, twenty-six participants were asked to drive in simulated night-time conditions, under controlled photometric conditions where the adaptation luminance and the glare level were consistent with a two-lane rural road at night with oncoming traffic. The visual effects of a bilateral cataract were simulated using goggles which were in the range of an early cataract in terms of light scattering, light transmission, visual acuity and contrast sensitivity loss. Participants were asked to avoid virtual pedestrians on the road, both with and without a simulated cataract. Three performance indexes were considered: the rate of pedestrian crashes, the distance to the pedestrian when the participant avoided the crash, and the mean speed, which allowed to control for a possible behavioral adaptation to the reduced visual performance. For a better understanding of the visual functions responsible for the degraded driving behavior, contrast sensitivity and time-to-collision performance were also measured in glare conditions.While simulated cataract resulted in slightly slower speeds, poorer driving performance was observed with the goggles than without, with more pedestrians being hit and shorter stopping distances. Time-to-collision estimates at 90 km/h were found to be predictive of stopping distances with a simulated cataract, while contrast sensitivity in glare conditions at 13 cycles per degree was found to be associated with the occurrence of a crash with cataract.The decrease in speed with a simulated cataract was real but ineffective in terms of driving safety, which suggests that the behavioral adaptation to the degraded visual performance was insufficient. The precise impact of a cataract on driving abilities remains to be further studied, to provide scientific knowledge to help practitioners determine the moment when the individuals should forego driving.     

Effects of situational cues on prism-induced aftereffects

A test was made of the hypothesis that external stimuli present during exposure to lateral displacement of the visual field can serve as situational cues whose presence or absence will influence the magnitude of aftereffects manifested subsequent to adaptation resulting from the exposure. The results indicated that the relative aftereffects were significantly greater when thenondisplacing goggles were worn during the periods in which aftereffect measurements were taken than was the case when they were removed during these test periods. The finding that manipulation of certain cues, i.e., the restriction of the visual field, weight, etc., of the goggles, associated with the adaptation period can in part determine the size of observed aftereffects provides evidence in support of the notion that aftereffects can be conditioned to precisely given constellations of stimuli In addition, the need for caution in conceptualizing aftereffects as simply the persistence of adaptive shifts once visual displacement has been terminated is suggested.     

冲突观察能诱发冲突适应

重复启动效应和一致试次所占的比例都会影响冲突适应效应。采用词-色Stroop任务, 本研究在控制了重复启动效应和一致试次的比例之后, 通过三个实验共同探讨反应执行和冲突观察对冲突适应效应的影响。实验一发现当前试次的Stroop干扰效应, 但没有得到冲突适应效应; 在实验二中, 先前试次为四选一的选择反应时任务, 当前试次为词-色Stroop任务, 得到反转的冲突适应效应; 实验三和实验一程序相似, 但在先前试次上不执行反应, 得到了稳定的冲突适应效应。这些结果证明, 冲突观察能够诱发冲突适应机制, 提升当前的操作表现。     

Apparent displacement with a monocular prism differs from optical displacement

This experiment showed that phoria-induced displacement adds to or subtracts from prism-induced displacement. A near stimulus (25 cm) was apparently displaced more than the optical displacement when the base of a prism was out and less when the base was in. In contrast, a far stimulus (200 cm) was displaced less when the base was out and more when the base was in. Moreover, the between-subjects variability of the apparent displacement was greater with monocular than with binocular viewing. Some implications for studies on monocular prism adaptation are discussed.     

Strategic calibration and spatial alignment: a model from prism adaptation

Two types of adaptive processes involved in prism adaptation have been identified&colon: Slower spatial realignment among the several unique sensorimotor coordinate systems (spatial maps) and faster strategic motor control responses(including skill learning and calibration) to spatial misalignment. One measures the 1st process by assessing the aftereffects of prism exposure, whereas direct effects of the prism during exposure are a measure of the 2nd process. A model is described that relates those adaptive processes and distinguishes between extraordinary alignment and ordinary calibration. A conformal translation algorithm that operates on the hypothesized circuitry is proposed. The authors apply to the model to explain the advantage of visual calibration when the limb is seen in the starting position prior to movement initiation. Implications of the model for the use of prism adaptation as a tool for investigation of motor control and learning are discussed.     

Cognitive Load and Prism Adaptation

Subjects wore goggles with prisms that laterally displaced the visual field (rightward by 11.4 degree) and with full view of the limb engaged in paced (2-s rate) sagittal pointing at either an implicit ("straight ahead of the nose") target (Experiment 1) or an explicit (positioned leftward by 11.4 degree) target (in Experiment 2). In experimental conditions, subjects performed a secondary cognitive task (mental arithmetic) simultaneously during target pointing. In control conditions, no cognitive load was imposed. Aftereffect measures of adaptation to the prismatic displacement were not substantially different when problem solving was required, but terminal error of the exposure pointing task was reliably affected by cognitive load. These results are consistent with the hypothesis of separable mechanisms for adaptive coordination and adaptive alignment. Adaptive coordination may be mediated by strategically flexible coordinative linkage between sensory motor systems (eye-head and hand-head), but spatial alignment seems to be mediated by adaptive encoders within coordinatively linked subsystems. If the coordination task involves predominately automatic processing, coordinative linkage can be frequent enough under cognitive load for substantial realignment to occur even though exposure performance (adaptive coordination) may be less than optimal.