Guidance or Interference? Augmented Feedback Benefits Bimanual Coordination Even After Removal

Chiou S-C, Chang EC. Guidance or Interference? Augmented Feedback Benefits Bimanual Coordination Even After Removal. Presented at the 10th Asia-Pacific Conference on Vision (APCV), Takamatsu, Japan

Bimanual Coordination Learning with Different Augmented Feedback Modalities and Information Types

Chiou S-C, Chang EC. Bimanual Coordination Learning with Different Augmented Feedback Modalities and Information Types. PLOS ONE. 2016;11(2): e0149221.Previous studies have shown that bimanual coordination learning is more resistant to the removal of augmented feedback when acquired with auditory than with visual channel. However, it is unclear whether this differential “guidance effect” between feedback modalities is due to enhanced sensorimotor integration via the non-dominant auditory channel or strengthened linkage to kinesthetic information under rhythmic input. The current study aimed to examine how modalities (visual vs. auditory) and information types (continuous visuospatial vs. discrete rhythmic) of concurrent augmented feedback influence bimanual coordination learning. Participants either learned a 90°-out-of-phase pattern for three consecutive days with Lissajous feedback indicating the integrated position of both arms, or with visual or auditory rhythmic feedback reflecting the relative timing of the movement. The results showed diverse performance change after practice when the feedback was removed between Lissajous and the other two rhythmic groups, indicating that the guidance effect may be modulated by the type of information provided during practice. Moreover, significant performance improvement in the dual-task condition where the irregular rhythm counting task was applied as a secondary task also suggested that lower involvement of conscious control may result in better performance in bimanual coordination

The cortical mechanisms of visual stability

Visual stability refers to the apparent stability of the visual world given the displacement of retinal images induced by eye movements. Phenomenally visual stability involves both a stable representation of visual space and reduced sensitivities to perceptual changes at the temporal proximity of eye movements. While the psychophysics of the perisaccadic perceptual changes have been studied extensively, how visual stability is implemented in the human visual system remains to be explored. This dissertation examines the cortical mechanisms of perceptual stability in spatial vision with four series of experiments. Series 1 established a paradigm to induce saccadic suppression of displacement (SSD) and examined how the direction of saccades and displacements influence the strength of SSD. Series 2 examined the consequence of disrupting the posterior parietal cortex (PPC) with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in perceiving perisaccadic displacements. Series 3 examined psychophysical factors influencing perisaccadic mislocalization. Finally, series 4 explored how TMS on PPC impacts perisaccadic mislocalization. These experiments conjointly illustrate how the PPC contributes to a stable visuospatial perception during saccades

Bimanual Coordination Learning with Different Augmented Feedback Modalities and Information Types

<div><p>Previous studies have shown that bimanual coordination learning is more resistant to the removal of augmented feedback when acquired with auditory than with visual channel. However, it is unclear whether this differential “guidance effect” between feedback modalities is due to enhanced sensorimotor integration via the non-dominant auditory channel or strengthened linkage to kinesthetic information under rhythmic input. The current study aimed to examine how modalities (visual vs. auditory) and information types (continuous visuospatial vs. discrete rhythmic) of concurrent augmented feedback influence bimanual coordination learning. Participants either learned a 90°-out-of-phase pattern for three consecutive days with Lissajous feedback indicating the integrated position of both arms, or with visual or auditory rhythmic feedback reflecting the relative timing of the movement. The results showed diverse performance change after practice when the feedback was removed between Lissajous and the other two rhythmic groups, indicating that the guidance effect may be modulated by the type of information provided during practice. Moreover, significant performance improvement in the dual-task condition where the irregular rhythm counting task was applied as a secondary task also suggested that lower involvement of conscious control may result in better performance in bimanual coordination.</p></div

Illustration of different augmented feedback.

<p>(A) Lissajous (continuous visuospatial) feedback. Note that the dotted circle configuration is for clarity of illustration and was not seen by the participant. (B) Color (discrete visual rhythmic) feedback. (C) Tone (discrete auditory rhythmic) feedback.</p

Experimental protocol.

<p>In the practice phase, participants practiced for three blocks per day (10 trials/block, 40 s/trial) with augmented feedback. After practicing for three consecutive days, two sessions of the no-feedback transfer test were applied on day 3 (immediate test) and day 4 (24-hour retention test), respectively. Finally, in the dual-task interference session, participants performed three different types of irregular rhythm counting tasks (each type for one block, 10 trials/block, 25 s/trial) concurrently with the motor task. Two “single-task” blocks (motor task only without augmented feedback) were interleaved between the interference blocks.</p

Motor performance in the practice phase, the test phase, and the dual-task interference session.

<p>Square markers represent averaged RMSE of individual blocks in each group, with the last block of each day filled in dark colors. Error bars indicate standard deviation of each block and shaded areas indicate 95% confidence interval of each trial. Two sessions in the no-feedback transfer test (No-FB) are: (1) immediate test on day 3 and (2) 24-hour retention test on day 4.</p

Performance change after feedback removal.

<p>Performance change after feedback removal.</p

Illustration of the irregular rhythm counting task.

<p>(A) Visual rhythm–continuous (VR-C). (B) Visual rhythm–discrete (VR-D). (C) Auditory rhythm–discrete (AR-D).</p

Illustration of the participant and apparatus.

<p>Illustration of the participant and apparatus.</p