Prism adaptation in left-handers

Two experiments with left-handers examined the features of prism adaptation established by previous research with right-handers. Regardless of handedness, (1) rapid adaptation occurs in exposure pointing with developing error in the opposite direction after target achievement, especially with early visual feedback in target pointing; (2) proprioceptive or visual aftereffects are larger, depending on whether visual feedback is available early or late, respectively, in target pointing; (3) the sum of these aftereffects is equal to the total aftereffect for the eye-hand coordination loop; (4) intermanual transfer of visual aftereffects occurs only for the dominant hand; and (5) visual aftereffects are larger in left space when the dominant hand is exposed to leftward displacement. A notable handedness difference is that, while transfer of proprioceptive aftereffects only occurs to the nondominant hand in right-handers, transfer occurs in both directions for left-handers, but regardless of handedness, such transfer only occurs when the exposed hand is tested first after exposure. A discussion then focuses on the implications of these data for a theory of handedness.     

Prism adaptation in alternately exposed hands

We assessed intermanual transfer of the proprioceptive realignment aftereffects of prism adaptation in right-handers by examining alternate target pointing with the two hands for 40 successive trials, 20 with each hand. Adaptation for the right hand was not different as a function of exposure sequence order or postexposure test order, in contrast with adaptation for the left hand. Adaptation was greater for the left hand when the right hand started the alternate pointing than when the sequence of target-pointing movements started with the left hand. Also, the largest left-hand adaptation appeared when that hand was tested first after exposure. Terminal error during exposure varied in cycles for the two hands, converging on zero when the right hand led, but no difference appeared between the two hands when the left hand led. These results suggest that transfer of proprioceptive realignment occurs from the right to the left hand during both exposure and postexposure testing. Such transfer reflects the process of maintaining spatial alignment between the two hands. Normally, the left hand appears to be calibrated with the right-hand spatial map, and when the two hands are misaligned, the left-hand spatial map is realigned with the right-hand spatial map.     

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.     

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.     

Strategie Calibration and Spatial Alignment: A Model From Prism Adaptation

Two types of adaptive processes involved in prism adaptation have been identified: 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 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.     

The influence of a secondary task and type of feedback on adaptation to lateral displacement of the visual array

Summary This experiment was designed to investigate the influence of a secondary attention-demanding force-production task on adaptation to prismatic displacement. Recent suggestions by Finke (1979) lead to the prediction that a secondary task executed during adaptation would interfere with the central component of adaptation (as measured by intermanual transfer), but not the peripheral component (adaptation specific to adapted limb). There were three secondary task conditions (no task, easy task, difficult task). Other factors investigated were: type of feedback (continuous, terminal), hand adapted (right, left) and prism orientation (base right, base left). While negative aftereffect was not influenced by the secondary task manipulation, intermanual transfer results provide partial support for Finke's model. Correlational analyses indicate the importance of task-specific parameters in determining the nature of perceptual-motor adaptation.     

Prism exposure aftereffects and direct effects for different movement and feedback times

The effects of movement time and time to visual feedback (feedback time) on prism exposure aftereffects and direct effects were studied. In Experiment 1, the participants' (N = 60) pointing limb became visible early in the movement (.2-s feedback time), and eye-head aftereffects increased with increasing movement time (.5 to 3.0 s), but larger hand-head aftereffects showed little change. Direct effects (terminal error during exposure) showed near-perfect compensation for the prismatic displacement (11.4 diopters) when movement time was short but decreasing compensation with longer movement times. In Experiment 2, participants' (N = 48) eye-head aftereffects increased and their larger hand-head aftereffects decreased with increasing movement time (2.0 and 3.0 s), especially when feedback time increased (.25 and 1.5 s). Direct effects showed increasing overcompensation for longer movement and feedback times. Those results suggest that aftereffects and direct effects measure distinct adaptive processes, namely, spatial realignment and strategic control, respectively. Differences in movement and feedback times evoke different eye-hand coordination strategies and consequent direct effects. Realignment aftereffects also depend upon the coordination strategy deployed, but not all strategies support realignment. Moreover, realignment is transparent to strategic control and, when added to strategic correction, may produce nonadaptive performance.     

Prism Exposure Aftereffects and Direct Effects for Different Movement and Feedback Times

The effects of movement time and time to visual feedback (feedback time) on prism exposure aftereffects and direct effects were studied. In Experiment 1, the participants' (N = 60) pointing limb became visible early in the movement (.2-s feedback time, and eye-head aftereffects increased with increasing movement time (.5 to 3.0 s), but larger hand-head aftereffects showed little change. Direct effects (terminal error during exposure) showed near-perfect compensation for the prismatic displacement (11.4 diopters) when movement time was short but decreasing compensation with longer movement times. In Experiment 2, participants' (N = 48) eye-head aftereffects increased and their larger hand-head aftereffects decreased with increasing movement time (2.0 and 3.0 s), especially when feedback time increased (.25 and 1.5 s). Direct effects showed increasing overcompensation for longer movement and feedback times. Those results suggest that aftereffects and direct effects measure distinct adaptive processes, namely, spatial realignment and strategic control, respectively. Differences in movement and feedback times evoke different eye -hand coordination strategies and consequent direct effects. Realignment aftereffects also depend upon the coordination strategy deployed, but not all strategies support realignment. Moreover, realignment is transparent to strategic control and, when added to strategic correction, may produce nonadaptive performance.     

Prism Adaptation During Target Pointing From Visible and Nonvisible Starting Locations

The performance of subjects whose starting limb location was visible when pointing to a sagittal target during exposure to prismatic displacement showed immediate target acquisition, but aftereffects of exposure were absent. When starting limb location was not visible, accurate exposure performance was slow to develop, but aftereffects were substantial. Visible starting location evoked a zeroing-in control strategy on the basis of relative-location coding, which rapidly reduced performance error but disabled detection of spatial misalignment between sensorimotor systems. When starting location was not visible, absolute-location coding of the displaced target initiated movement that had to be corrected subsequently by visual feedback. In this case, comparison of the initial erroneous movement code with the limb location that achieved the target enabled misalignment detection and consequent realignment.     

Movement and illumination factors in adaptation to prismatic viewing

While wearing laterally displacing prisms, Ss were required to align a spot of light to the phenomenal straightahead. These measurements were obtained at the beginning and at the end of an exposure to prismatic displacement. In addition, Ss either actively controlled movement of the spot of light, or movement was manipulated by E under the direction of the S. Aftereffects were determined by having S position the spot of light with normal vision at the beginning of the experiment and after each measurement obtained under prism viewing. Ss in the darkened room condition who were required to align the spot of light actively showed a significant aftereffect in the direction of prismatic displacement both at the beginning and at the end of the exposure period. No difference in the degree of adaptation was found between those measurements at the beginning and at the end of the exposure period. No significant aftereffects were found when the room was illuminated during prism exposure or when E controlled movement of the light source.     

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.     

Conflict between aftereffects of retinal sweep and looming motion

Summary Observers looked monocularly into a tunnel, with gratings on the left and right sides drifting toward the head. An exposure period was followed by a test with fixed gratings. With fixation points, left and right retinal fields could be stimulated selectively. When exposure and test were on the same retinal fields, but fixation was on opposite sides of the tunnel during exposure and test periods, aftereffects of retinal sweep and of perceived looming were in opposite directions. The two effects tended to cancel, yielding no perceived aftereffect. When they did occur, aftereffects in the retinal and the looming directions were equally likely. Cancellation was significantly more likely in the experimental conditions than in the control, when fixation always remained on the same side. When areas of retinal stimulation in the exposure and test periods did not overlap, cancellation was less frequent and aftereffects of looming were more frequent. Results were not significantly different for left and right visual fields, indicating that cortical vs. subcortical OKN pathways do not influence the illusion. Vection resulted for 16 of 20 observers under one or another of our conditions.     

Prism aftereffects disrupt interlimb rhythmic coordination

The authors examined effects of prism-induced proprioceptive aftereffects on coordination of 95 participants and compared interlimb rhythmic coordination performed before versus after exposure to prisms of varying optical displacements. The observed steady states of relative phase for postprism exposure coordination were shifted by a small but significant amount, but not across all prism conditions. Phase-shift direction was not specific to the direction of optical displacement and was not, across all conditions, proportional to the magnitude of optical displacement. Prism exposure was associated with increased relative phase variability for all prism conditions. A no-prism control group showed no changes in interlimb rhythmic coordination. The results suggest that prism-induced proprioceptive aftereffects have general, disruptive effects on interlimb rhythmic coordination.     

Interlimb differences in visuomotor and dynamic adaptation during targeted reaching in children

While a number of studies have focused on movement (a)symmetries between the arms in adults, less is known about movement asymmetries in typically developing children. The goal of this study was to examine interlimb differences in children when adapting to novel visuomotor and dynamic conditions while performing a center-out reaching task. We tested 13 right-handed children aged 9–11 years old. Prior to movement, one of eight targets arranged radially around the start position was randomly displayed. Movements were made either with the right (dominant) arm or the left (nondominant) arm. The children participated in two experiments separated by at least one week. In one experiment, subjects were exposed to a rotated visual display (30° about the start circle); and in the other, a 1 kg mass (attached eccentrically to the forearm axis). Each experiment consisted of three blocks: pre-exposure, exposure and post-exposure. Three measures of task performance were calculated from hand trajectory data: hand-path deviation from the straight target line, direction error at peak velocity and final position error. Results showed that during visuomotor adaptation, no interlimb differences were observed for any of the three measures. During dynamic adaptation, however, a significant difference between the arms was observed at the first cycle during dynamic adaptation. With regard to the aftereffects observed during the post-exposure block, direction error data indicate considerably large aftereffects for both arms during visuomotor adaptation; and there was a significant difference between the arms, resulting in substantially larger aftereffects for the right arm. Similarly, dynamic adaptation results also showed a significant difference between the arms; and post hoc analyses indicated that aftereffects were present only for the right arm. Collectively, these findings indicate that the dominant arm advantage for developing an internal model associated with a novel visuomotor or dynamic transform, as previously shown in young adults, may already be apparent at 9 to 11-year old children.     

Immediate and latent interlimb transfer of gait stability adaptation following repeated exposure to slips

The authors trained 21 participants by using blocked-and-mixed exposure to right-side slips and then caused them to slip unexpectedly on the untrained left side. Authors retested participants with a right slip and a left slip at 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, and 4 months. The authors found that preslip stability on the first untrained left slip improved and was significantly greater than that on the first right slip, which probably contributed to the reduction in incidence of falls from approximately 30% to approximately 10%. Postslip stability and base of support (BOS) slip velocity were similar to those on the first right slip and much lower than those on the last right slip. Increases in pre- and postslip stabilities and BOS slip velocity during the left slip led to reductions in backward balance loss (BLOB) from approximately 95% on initial left slip to approximately 60% and to approximately 25% on the 1st and 3rd retest sessions, respectively. In contrast, BLOB remained at a constant approximately 40% level on the right slip of the same retest sessions. The results indicate a partial immediate transfer and a possible latent transfer.     

Immediate and Latent Interlimb Transfer of Gait Stability Adaptation Following Repeated Exposure to Slips

The authors trained 21 participants by using blocked-and-mixed exposure to right-side slips and then caused them to slip unexpectedly on the untrained left side. Authors retested participants with a right slip and a left slip at 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, and 4 months. The authors found that preslip stability on the first untrained left slip improved and was significantly greater than that on the first right slip, which probably contributed to the reduction in incidence of falls from ~30% to ~10%. Postslip stability and base of support (BOS) slip velocity were similar to those on the first right slip and much lower than those on the last right slip. Increases in pre- and postslip stabilities and BOS slip velocity during the left slip led to reductions in backward balance loss (BLOB) from ~95% on initial left slip to ~60% and to ~25% on the 1st and 3rd retest sessions, respectively. In contrast, BLOB remained at a constant ~40% level on the right slip of the same retest sessions. The results indicate a partial immediate transfer and a possible latent transfer.     

Improvement of mental imagery after prism exposure in neglect: a case study

Previous work has shown that various symptoms of unilateral neglect, including the pathological shift of the subjective midline to the right, may be improved by a short adaptation period to a prismatic shift of the visual field to the right. We report here the improvement of imagined neglect after prism exposure in a patient with a left unilateral neglect. Despite a strong neglect observed for mental images as well as for conventional tests, the mental evocation of left-sided information from an internal image of the map of France map was fully recovered following prism adaptation to the right. This improvement could not be explained by the alteration of visuomotor responses induced by the prism adaptation. Prism adaptation may therefore act not only on sensory-motor levels but also on a higher cognitive level of mental space representation and/or exploration.     

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.     

Postural asymmetries in response to holding evenly and unevenly distributed loads during self-selected stance

The authors examined postural asymmetries during quiet stance and while holding evenly or unevenly distributed loads. Right-hand dominant subjects preferentially loaded their right lower limb when holding no load or a load evenly distributed in both hands, but no differences in center of pressure (CoP) were observed between the left and right limbs. However, longer CoP displacement was observed under the preferentially loaded limb, which may reflect a functional asymmetry that allows quick movement of one limb in response to a potential perturbation. When a load was held only in the nondominant hand, sample entropy decreased in the left (loaded) limb but increased in the right (unloaded) limb, suggesting the unloaded foot compensated for a loss of control flexibility in the loaded foot.     

Postural Asymmetries in Response to Holding Evenly and Unevenly Distributed Loads During Self-Selected Stance

The authors examined postural asymmetries during quiet stance and while holding evenly or unevenly distributed loads. Right-hand dominant subjects preferentially loaded their right lower limb when holding no load or a load evenly distributed in both hands, but no differences in center of pressure (CoP) were observed between the left and right limbs. However, longer CoP displacement was observed under the preferentially loaded limb, which may reflect a functional asymmetry that allows quick movement of one limb in response to a potential perturbation. When a load was held only in the nondominant hand, sample entropy decreased in the left (loaded) limb but increased in the right (unloaded) limb, suggesting the unloaded foot compensated for a loss of control flexibility in the loaded foot.