An explicit strategy prevails when the cerebellum fails to compute movement errors

Jordan A Taylor, Nola M Klemfuss, Richard B Ivry, Jordan A Taylor, Nola M Klemfuss, Richard B Ivry

Abstract

In sensorimotor adaptation, explicit cognitive strategies are thought to be unnecessary because the motor system implicitly corrects performance throughout training. This seemingly automatic process involves computing an error between the planned movement and actual feedback of the movement. When explicitly provided with an effective strategy to overcome an experimentally induced visual perturbation, people are immediately successful and regain good task performance. However, as training continues, their accuracy gets worse over time. This counterintuitive result has been attributed to the independence of implicit motor processes and explicit cognitive strategies. The cerebellum has been hypothesized to be critical for the computation of the motor error signals that are necessary for implicit adaptation. We explored this hypothesis by testing patients with cerebellar degeneration on a motor learning task that puts the explicit and implicit systems in conflict. Given this, we predicted that the patients would be better than controls in maintaining an effective strategy assuming strategic and adaptive processes are functionally and neurally independent. Consistent with this prediction, the patients were easily able to implement an explicit cognitive strategy and showed minimal interference from undesirable motor adaptation throughout training. These results further reveal the critical role of the cerebellum in an implicit adaptive process based on movement errors and suggest an asymmetrical interaction of implicit and explicit processes.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
a, b Mean trajectory during the baseline (black) and strategy-only (orange) blocks for a representative control participant (a) and patient with ataxia (b). Movements are approximately straight and directed toward the cued green target in the baseline block and to the adjacent (45°CW) blue “aiming target” in the strategy-only block. Shading indicates the 95% confidence intervals of the trajectories. c, d Target errors for these two participants across the phases of the experiment: second baseline phase (black), rotation phase (blue; between vertical dashed lines), washout without feedback (magenta), and washout with feedback (cyan). The rotation was turned on without warning for two movements (red) before the participants were instructed to use a strategy to counteract the rotation. Lower Participants performed 244 movements throughout seven phases of the experiment
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
a Mean target error across the experimental session for each group (filled = ataxic; open = controls). The color coding is the same as in Fig. 1. b Drift rate as estimated from regression analysis over the rotation + strategy phase. The individual data are shown as empty circles for the control participants (left) and filled circles for the individuals with ataxia (right)

References

    1. Krakauer JW. Motor learning and consolidation: the case of visuomotor rotation. Advances in experimental medicine and biology. Progress in Motor Control. 2008;629:405–21. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-77064-2_21.
    1. Cunningham H. Aiming error under transformed spatial mappings suggests a structure for visual-motor maps. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1989;15(3):493–506. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.15.3.493.
    1. Curran T, Keele SW. Attentional and nonattentional forms of sequence learning. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1993;19:189–202. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.19.1.189.
    1. Hwang EJ, Smith MA, Shadmehr R. Dissociable effects of the implicit and explicit memory systems on learning control of reaching. Exp Brain Res. 2006;173(3):425–37. doi: 10.1007/s00221-006-0391-0.
    1. Werner S, Bock O. Effects of variable practice and declarative knowledge on sensorimotor adaptation to rotated visual feedback. Exp Brain Res. 2007;178(4):554–9. doi: 10.1007/s00221-007-0925-0.
    1. Mazzoni P, Krakauer J. An implicit plan overrides an explicit strategy during visuomotor adaptation. J Neurosci. 2006;26(14):3642. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5317-05.2006.
    1. Sülzenbrück S, Heuer H. Functional independence of explicit and implicit motor adjustments. Conscious Cogn. 2009;18(1):145–59. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2008.12.001.
    1. Martin TA, Keating JG, Goodkin HP, Bastian AJ, Thach WT. Throwing while looking through prisms: I. Focal olivocerebellar lesions impair adaptation. Brain. 1996;119(4):1183. doi: 10.1093/brain/119.4.1183.
    1. Tseng Y, Diedrichsen J, Krakauer JW, Shadmehr R, Bastian AJ. Sensory prediction errors drive cerebellum-dependent adaptation of reaching. J Neurophysiol. 2007;98(1):54–62. doi: 10.1152/jn.00266.2007.
    1. Rabe K, Livne O, Gizewski ER, Aurich V, Beck A, Timmann D, et al. Adaptation to visuomotor rotation and force field perturbation is correlated to different brain areas in patients with cerebellar degeneration. J Neurophysiol. 2009;101(4):1961–71. doi: 10.1152/jn.91069.2008.
    1. Werner S, Bock O, Gizewski ER, Schoch B, Timmann D. Visuomotor adaptive improvement and aftereffects are impaired differentially following cerebellar lesions in SCA and PICA territory. Exp Brain Res. 2009;201(3):429–39. doi: 10.1007/s00221-009-2052-6.
    1. Trouillas P. International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale for pharmacological assessment of the cerebellar syndrome. The Ataxia Neuropharmacology Committee of the World Federation of Neurology. J Neurol Sci. 1997;145:205–11. doi: 10.1016/S0022-510X(96)00231-6.
    1. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12(3):189–98. doi: 10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6.
    1. Reitan R. The relation of the trail making test to organic brain damage. J Consult Psychol. 1955;19(5):393–4. doi: 10.1037/h0044509.
    1. Bright P, Jaldow E, Kopelman MD. The National Adult Reading Test as a measure of premorbid intelligence: a comparison with estimates derived from demographic variables. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2002;8(6):847–54. doi: 10.1017/S1355617702860131.
    1. Smith MA, Ghazizadeh A, Shadmehr R. Interacting adaptive processes with different timescales underlie short-term motor learning. PLoS Biol. 2006;4(6):e179. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040179.
    1. Taylor JA, Thoroughman KA. Divided attention impairs human motor adaptation but not feedback control. J Neurophysiol. 2007;98(1):317–26. doi: 10.1152/jn.01070.2006.
    1. Taylor JA, Thoroughman KA. Motor adaptation scaled by the difficulty of a secondary cognitive task. PLoS ONE. 2008;3(6):e2485. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002485.
    1. Galea JM, Sami SA, Albert NB, Miall RC. Secondary tasks impair adaptation to step- and gradual-visual displacements [Internet] Exp Brain Res. 2010;202:473–84. doi: 10.1007/s00221-010-2158-x.
    1. Anguera JA, Reuter-Lorenz PA, Willingham DT, Seidler RD. Contributions of spatial working memory to visuomotor learning [Internet] J Cogn Neurosci. 2009;22(9):1917–30. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21351.
    1. Smith MA. Intact ability to learn internal models of arm dynamics in Huntington’s disease but not cerebellar degeneration. J Neurophysiol. 2005;93(5):2809–21. doi: 10.1152/jn.00943.2004.
    1. Willingham DB. A neuropsychological theory of motor skill learning. Psychol Rev. 1998;105:558–84. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.105.3.558.
    1. Heuer H, Hegele M. Adaptation to visuomotor rotations in younger and older adults. Psychol Aging. 2008;23(1):190. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.23.1.190.
    1. Martin TA, Keating JG, Goodkin HP, Bastian AJ, Thach WT. Throwing while looking through prisms: II. Specificity and storage of multiple gaze–throw calibrations. Brain. 1996;119(4):1199. doi: 10.1093/brain/119.4.1199.
    1. Spencer RM, Ivry RB. Sequence learning is preserved in individuals with cerebellar degeneration when the movements are directly cued. J Cogn Neurosci. 2009;21(7):1302–10. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21102.
    1. Criscimagna-Hemminger S, Bastian AJ, Shadmehr R. Size of error affects cerebellar contributions to motor learning. J Neurophysiol. 2010;103:2275–84. doi: 10.1152/jn.00822.2009.
    1. Ito M. Control of mental activities by internal models in the cerebellum. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2008;9(4):304–13. doi: 10.1038/nrn2332.

Source: PubMed

3
購読する