Notes and Comments the Role of Action Feedback in the Acquisition of Simple Motor Responses

The use of visual action feedback (AIF) in learning a simple motor response can sometimes be as effective as the more conventional terminal feedback (TIF) but sometimes leads to gross overshooting errors when AIF is removed. Both the amplitude of movement and the gain of the AIF have strong and systematic effects on the error in attempted reproductions. Percent overestimation increases linearly with fog. gain and decreases linearly with log. amplitude. This may be due to an intersensory effect in which visual and kinesthetic feedback sum to form a unitary impression of the movement on which subsequent attempts at reproduction are based.     

The effects of delayed and displaced visual feedback on motor control

Developments in television technology have made possible new approaches to the study of the role of visual feedback in motor control. In two experiments using a special videodisc recording and playback system, the effects of delaying for 66 msec a subject's view of his own hand during a target-directed movement was investigated. The observed effects of such visually delayed feedback compared to spatially distorted feedback produced by prisms led to three major conclusions: (a) despite the behavioral similarity (overshooting) induced by the two kinds of altered feedback, the role of each in the visual-motor control loop is different; (b) adaptation to and the after effect of the two kinds of altered feedback are based on different control mechanisms (c) the processing and use of visual information in hand control requires less time than previous experiments have indicated.     

Watching a cursor distorts haptically guided reproduction of mouse movement

Participants moved a mouse along a force-feedback-defined linear path, either without vision or while watching a cursor set to 1 of 3 levels of visual:haptic gain (all >1:1). They attempted to haptically reproduce the movement without visual feedback. Errors increased with gain, reaching 70% overestimation at the highest gain. Forewarning participants about gain variability did not eliminate this effect. The gain level was potentially cued during the movement by the mismatch between visual feedback and kinesthetic feedback. Moreover, because participants did not achieve cursor-speed constancy across gain levels, visual speed was another cue to gain. Collectively, these cues failed to prevent visual distortion of movement reproduction.     

The relationship between types of feedback, gain of a display and feedback precision in acquisition of a simple motor task

Three experiments are reported which investigate the role of concurrent and terminal feedback in the acquisition of a discrete positioning task. Experiments I and II compare the efficiency of concurrent visual feedback (CVF) and terminal visual feedback (TVF) as training methods when the gain of the visual display is varied from 1:1 to 4:1. There is a consistent interaction between feedback method and gain of the display over the recall trials. Concurrent visual feedback is inferior to terminal visual feedback at a gain of 4:1 in Experiment I and when the displayed and actual movement directions differ (Experiment II). Experiment III explores the relationship between concurrent and terminal feedback when feedback is of a digital form and its precision is varied. Concurrent feedback is worse as a training method although there is no interaction between feedback method and precision of feedback. These findings are discussed in the light of a variety of factors which could contribute to the inferiority of concurrent feedback as a training method.     

Scaling movement amplitude: adaptation of timing and amplitude control in a bimanual task

Participants traced two circles simultaneously and the diameter of one circle was scaled as the diameter of the other circle remained constant. When the scaled circle was larger, amplitude error shifted from overshooting to undershooting, while shifting from undershooting to overshooting when this circle was smaller. Asymmetric coordination was unstable when the left arm traced a circle larger than the right arm, yet stable when the left arm traced a smaller circle. When producing symmetric coordination and the left arm traced the larger circle, relative phase shifted by 30°, but a right arm lead predominated. When the left arm traced the smaller circle and symmetric coordination was required, a 30° shift in relative phase occurred, but hand lead changed from left to right. The modulation of movement amplitude and relative phase emerged simultaneously as a result of neural crosstalk effects linked to initial amplitude conditions and possibly visual feedback of the hands' motion.     

Visual correction of a rapid goal-directed response

The purpose of this study was to investigate the role of dynamic and static visual cues in improvement of accuracy during a pointing movement. In the experiment, subjects were required to point finger rapidly at visual targets as accurately as possible. Movement amplitude was 15 cm, and movement times ranged from 100 to 190 msec. Three visual feedback conditions were applied: no feedback, dynamic ongoing feedback on the complete hand trajectory, and static error feedback on the movement end-point. Two spatial movement outcomes were considered, mean constant error and intraindividual dispersion of pointings. Data were analyzed with regard to effects of feedback and speed. Under the no-feedback condition, accuracy was lowest; constant error was not speed-dependent, whereas dispersion increased with speed of movement. Accuracy was highest under the complete feedback condition and was speed-dependent, as shown by both constant error and dispersion. Under error feedback, accuracy was intermediate and was also speed-dependent. The results are discussed in terms of the interchange between correcting mechanisms vs delayed control within the motor regulatory processes.     

Effects of movement duration and visual feedback on visual and proprioceptive components of prism adaptation

While looking through laterally displacing prisms, subjects pointed sagittally 80 times at an objectively straight-ahead target, completing a reciprocal out-and-back pointing movement ever 1, 3, or 6 s. Visual feedback was available early in the pointing movement or only late at the end of the movement. Aftereffect measures of adaptive shift (obtained after every 10 pointing trials) showed adaptive change only in limb position sense (i.e., proprioceptive adaptation) when movement duration was 1 s, regardless of visual feedback condition; but as movement duration increased, adaptive change in the eye position sense (i.e., visual adaptation) increased while proprioceptive adaptation decreased, especially for the late visual feedback condition. Regardless of visual feedback condition, proprioceptive adaptation showed the maximal rate of growth with the 1-s movement duration, whereas visual adaptation showed maximal growth with the 6-s movement duration. These results provide additional support for a model of adaptive spatial mapping in which the direction of strategically flexible coordination (guidance) between eye and limb (and consequently the locus of adaptive spatial mapping) is jointly determined by movement duration and timing of visual feedback. An additional effect of movement duration is to determine the rate of discordant inputs. Maximal growth of adaptation occurs when the input rate matches the response time of the spatial mapping function.     

Effects of Movement Duration and Visual Feedback on Visual and Proprioceptive Components of Prism Adaptation

While looking through laterally displacing prisms, subjects pointed sagittally 80 times at an objectively straight-ahead target, completing a reciprocal out-and-back pointing movement every 1, 3, or 6 s. Visual feedback was available early in the pointing movement or only late at the end of movement. Aftereffect measures of adaptive shift (obtained after every 10 pointing trials) showed adaptive change only in limb position sense (i.e., proprioceptive adaptation) when movement duration was 1 s, regardless of visual feedback condition; but as movement duration increased, adaptive change in the eye position sense (i.e., visual adaptation) increased while proprioceptive adaptation decreased, especially for the late visual feedback condition. Regardless of visual feedback condition, proprioceptive adaptation showed the maximal rate of growth with the 1-s movement duration, whereas visual adaptation showed maximal growth with the 6-s movement duration. These results provide additional support for a model of adaptive spatial mapping in which the direction of strategically flexible coordination (guidance) between eye and limb (and consequently the locus of adaptive spatial mapping) is jointly determined by movement duration and timing of visual feedback. An additional effect of movement duration is to determine the rate of discordant inputs. Maximal growth of adaptation occurs when the input rate matches the response time of the spatial mapping function.     

Distributed Control in Rapid Sequential Aiming Responses

The preparation and on-line control of short, rapid sequential aiming responses were studied in 3 experiments. Participants (N = 12 in Experiments 1 and 2, and 20 in Experiment 3) produced 3-segment responses (a) within self-initiation, simple reaction time (RT), and choice RT paradigms (Experiment 1); (b) without visual feedback under self-initiation conditions (Experiment 2); and (c) with and without visual feedback under simple RT conditions (Experiment 3). In all conditions in which participants initiated movement in response to an external imperative signal, the 2nd response segment was performed consistently slower than preceding and succeeding response segments. That pattern of segmental movement times was found whether or not visual feedback was available but was not evident when participants self-initiated their responses with or without visual feedback. The findings rule out the possibility that subjects' use of visual feedback is responsible for the slowing of the 2nd response segment under RT conditions and suggest that the programming of rapid sequential aiming responses can be distributed in pre- and postinitiation intervals.     

Visual Feedback of Target Position Affects Accuracy of Sequential Movements at Even Spaces

The role of visual feedback during movement is attributed to its accuracy, but findings regarding the utilization of this information are inconsistent. We developed a novel dot-placing task to investigate the role of vision in arm movements. Participants conducted pointing-like movements between two target stimuli at even spaces. In Experiment 1, visual feedback of targets and response positions was manipulated. Although visual loss of target stimuli hindered accuracy of movements, the absence of the position of previously placed dots had little effect. In Experiment 2, the effect of movement time on accuracy was assessed, as the relationship between these has been traditionally understood as a speed/accuracy trade-off. Results revealed that duration of movement did not impact movement accuracy.     

Attention to visual feedback in motor learning

Visual guidance and movement to a stop were used to train subjects to make a simple movement without experiencing error in practice. Movement to a stop led to test performance as accurate as that after training with KR, but visual guidance did not. If a continuous visual cue as well as a stop were present during practice, subjects also performed less accurately, although they did not need to attend to the visual cue. All types of training were better than no training at all. Results are discussed in terms of the role of visual feedback in the development and assessment of programs for movement.     

The dual role of vision in sequential aiming movements

Previous research has demonstrated that movement times to the first target in sequential aiming movements are influenced by the properties of subsequent segments. Based on this finding, it has been proposed that individual segments are not controlled independently. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the role of visual feedback in the interaction between movement segments. In contrast to past research in which participants were instructed to minimize movement time, participants were set a criterion movement time and the resulting errors and limb trajectory kinematics were examined under vision and no vision conditions. Similar to single target movements, the results indicated that vision was used within each movement segment to correct errors in the limb trajectory. In mediating the transition between segments, visual feedback from the first movement segment was used to adjust the parameters of the second segment. Hence, increases in variability that occurred from the first to the second target in the no vision condition were curtailed when visual feedback was available. These results are discussed along the lines of the movement constraint and movement integration hypotheses.     

Attention to Visual Feedback in Motor Learning

Visual guidance and movement to a stop were used to train subjects to make a simple movement without experiencing error in practice. Movement to a stop led to test performance as accurate as that after training with KR, but visual guidance did not. If a continuous visual cue as well as a stop were present during practice, subjects also performed less accurately, although they did not need to attend to the visual cue. All types of training were better than no training at all. Results are discussed in terms of the role of visual feedback in the development and assessment of programs for movement.     

The effect of the Müller-Lyer illusion on the planning and control of manual aiming movements

Two experiments used Müller-Lyer stimuli to test the predictions of the planning-control model (S. Glover, 2002) for aiming movements. In Experiment 1, participants aimed to stimuli that either remained the same or changed upon movement initiation. Experiment 2 was identical except that the duration of visual feedback for online control was manipulated. The authors found that the figures visible during movement planning and online control had additive effects on endpoint bias, even when participants had ample time to use visual feedback to modify their movements (Experiment 2). These findings are problematic not only for the planning-control model but also for A. D. Milner and M. A. Goodale's (1995) two visual system explanation of illusory bias. Although our results are consistent with the idea that a single representation is used for perception, movement planning, and online control (e.g., V. H. Franz, 2001), other work from our laboratory and elsewhere suggests that the manner in which space is coded depends on constraints associated with the specific task, such as the visual cues available to the performer.     

The influence of advance information about target location and visual feedback on movement planning and execution.

This study was designed to determine if movement planning strategies incorporating the use of visual feedback during manual aiming are specific to individual movements. Advance information about target location and visual context was manipulated using precues. Participants exhibited a shorter reaction time and a longer movement time when they were certain of the target location and that vision would be available. The longer movement time was associated with greater time after peak velocity. Under conditions of uncertainty, participants prepared for the worst-case scenario. That is, they spent more time organizing their movements and produced trajectories that would be expected from greater open-loop control. Our results are consistent with hierarchical movement planning in which knowledge of the movement goal is an essential ingredient of visual feedback utilization.     

Terminal Feedback Outperforms Concurrent Visual,Auditory, and Haptic Feedback in Learning a Complex Rowing-Type Task

Augmented feedback, provided by coaches or displays, is a well-established strategy to accelerate motor learning. Frequent terminal feedback and concurrent feedback have been shown to be detrimental for simple motor task learning but supportive for complex motor task learning. However, conclusions on optimal feedback strategies have been mainly drawn from studies on artificial laboratory tasks with visual feedback only. Therefore, the authors compared the effectiveness of learning a complex, 3-dimensional rowing-type task with either concurrent visual, auditory, or haptic feedback to self-controlled terminal visual feedback. Results revealed that terminal visual feedback was most effective because it emphasized the internalization of task-relevant aspects. In contrast, concurrent feedback fostered the correction of task-irrelevant errors, which hindered learning. The concurrent visual and haptic feedback group performed much better during training with the feedback than in nonfeedback trials. Auditory feedback based on sonification of the movement error was not practical for training the 3-dimensional movement for most participants. Concurrent multimodal feedback in combination with terminal feedback may be most effective, especially if the feedback strategy is adapted to individual preferences and skill level.     

Coding of on-line and pre-planned movement sequences

Recent experiments have demonstrated that complex multi-element movement sequences were coded in visual-spatial coordinates even after extensive practice, while relatively simple spatial-temporal movement sequences are coded in motor coordinates after a single practice session. The purpose of the present experiment was to determine if the control process rather than the difficulty of the sequence played a role in determining the pattern of effector transfer. To accomplish this, different concurrent feedback conditions were provided to two groups of participants during practice of the same movement sequence. The results indicated that when concurrent visual feedback was provided during the production of the movement, which was thought to encourage on-line control, the participants performed transfer tests with the contra-lateral limb better when the visual-spatial coordinates were reinstated than when the motor coordinates were reinstated. When concurrent visual feedback was not provided, which was thought to encourage pre-planned control, the opposite was observed. The data are consistent with the hypothesis that the mode of control dictates the coordinate system used to code the movement sequence rather than sequence difficulty or stage of practice as has been proposed.     

Online versus offline processing of visual feedback in the control of movement amplitude

Researchers have suggested that visual feedback not only plays a role in the correction of errors during movement execution but that visual feedback from a completed movement is processed offline to improve programming on upcoming trials. In the present study, we examined the potential contribution of online and offline processing of visual feedback by analysing spatial variability at various kinematic landmarks in the limb trajectory (peak acceleration, peak velocity, peak negative acceleration and movement end). Participants performed a single degree of freedom video aiming task with and without vision of the cursor under four criterion movement times (225, 300, 375 and 450 ms). For movement times of 225 and 300 ms, the full vision condition was less variable than the no vision condition. However, the form of the variability profiles did not differ between visual conditions suggesting that the contribution of visual feedback was due to offline processes. In the 375 and 450 ms conditions, there was evidence for both online and offline control as the form of the variability profiles differed significantly between visual conditions.     

Effects of Pointing Rate and Availability of Visual Feedback on Visual and Proprioceptive Components of Prism Adaptation

While looking through laterally displacing prisms, subjects pointed 60 times straight ahead of their nose at a rate of one complete movement every 2 or 3 s, with visual feedback available early in the pointing movement or delayed until the end of the movement. Sagittal pointing was paced such that movement speed covaried with pointing rate. Aftereffect measures (obtained after every 10 pointing trials) showed that when the limb became visible early in a pointing movement, proprioceptive adaptation was greater than visual, but when visual feedback was delayed until the end of the movement, the reverse was true. This effect occurred only with the 3-s pointing rate, however. With the 2-s pointing rate, adaptation was predominately proprioceptive in nature, regardless of feedback availability. Independent of the availability of visual feedback, visual adaptation developed more quickly with 3-s pointing, whereas proprioceptive adaptation developed more rapidly with 2-s pointing. These results are discussed in terms of a model of perceptual-motor organization in which the direction of coordinative (guidance) linkage between eye-head (visual) and hand-head (proprioceptive) systems (and consequently the locus of discordance registration and adaptive recalibration) is determined jointly by pointing rate and feedback availability. An additional effect of pointing rate is to determine the rate of discordant inputs. Maximal adaptive recalibration occurs when the input (pointing) rate matches the time constant of the adaptive encoder in the guided system.     

Online versus offline processing of visual feedback in the production of component submovements

The present authors tested the assumptions in R. S. Woodworth's (1899) 2-component model regarding the specific roles of vision in the production of both the initial impulse and the error-correction phases of movement. Participants (N = 40) practiced a rapid aiming task (1,500 trials), with either no visual feedback, vision of only the 1st 50% of the movement, vision of only the 1st 75% of the movement, or vision of the entire movement. Consistent with previous research, the availability of vision over the 1st half of the movement had no effect on aiming accuracy during acquisition. In contrast, when visual feedback was available over the 1st 75% of the movement and the entire movement, initial impulse endpoints were less variable and the efficiency of the error-correction phase was improved. Analysis of spatial variability at various stages in the movement revealed that participants processed visual feedback offline to improve programming of the initial impulse and processed it online in regulating the deceleration of the initial impulse.