The effect of modeled absolute timing variability and relative timing variability on observational learning.

There is much evidence to suggest that skill learning is enhanced by skill observation. Recent research on this phenomenon indicates a benefit of observing variable/erred demonstrations. In this study, we explore whether it is variability within the relative organization or absolute parameterization of a movement that facilitates skill learning through observation. To do so, participants were randomly allocated into groups that observed a model with no variability, absolute timing variability, relative timing variability, or variability in both absolute and relative timing. All participants performed a four-segment movement pattern with specific absolute and relative timing goals prior to and following the observational intervention, as well as in a 24h retention test and transfers tests that featured new relative and absolute timing goals. Absolute timing error indicated that all groups initially acquired the absolute timing, maintained their performance at 24h retention, and exhibited performance deterioration in both transfer tests. Relative timing error revealed that the observation of no variability and relative timing variability produced greater performance at the post-test, 24h retention and relative timing transfer tests, but for the no variability group, deteriorated at absolute timing transfer test. The results suggest that the learning of absolute timing following observation unfolds irrespective of model variability. However, the learning of relative timing benefits from holding the absolute features constant, while the observation of no variability partially fails in transfer. We suggest learning by observing no variability and variable/erred models unfolds via similar neural mechanisms, although the latter benefits from the additional coding of information pertaining to movements that require a correction

The Multiple Process Model of Goal-Directed Reaching Revisited

Recently our group forwarded a model of speed-accuracy relations in goal-directed reaching. A fundamental feature of our multiple process model was the distinction between two types of online regulation: impulse control and limb-target control. Impulse control begins during the initial stages of the movement trajectory and involves a comparison of actual limb velocity and direction to an internal representation of expectations about the limb trajectory. Limb-target control involves discrete error-reduction based on the relative positions of the limb and the target late in the movement. Our model also considers the role of eye movements, practice, energy optimization and strategic behavior in limb control. Here, we review recent work conducted to test specific aspects of our model. As well, we consider research not fully incorporated into our earlier contribution. We conclude that a slightly modified and expanded version of our model, that includes crosstalk between the two forms of online regulation, does an excellent job of explaining speed, accuracy, and energy optimization in goal-directed reaching

The Influence of Visual Feedback and Prior Knowledge About Feedback on Vertical Aiming Strategies

Two experiments were conducted to examine time and energy optimization strategies for movements made with and against gravity. In Experiment 1, we manipulated concurrent visual feedback, and knowledge about feedback. When vision was eliminated upon movement initiation, participants exhibited greater undershooting, both with their primary submovement and their final endpoint, than when vision was available. When aiming downward, participants were more likely to terminate their aiming following the primary submovement or complete a lower amplitude corrective submovement. This strategy reduced the frequency of energy-consuming corrections against gravity. In Experiment 2, we eliminated vision of the hand and the target at the end of the movement. This procedure was expected to have its greatest impact under no vision conditions where no visual feedback was available for subsequent planning. As anticipated, direction and concurrent visual feedback had a profound impact on endpoint bias. Participants exhibited pronounced undershooting when aiming downward and without vision. Differences in undershooting between vision and no vision were greater under blocked feedback conditions. When performers were uncertain about the impending feedback, they planned their movements for the worst-case scenario. Thus movement planning considers the variability in execution, and avoids outcomes that require time and energy to correct

The Multiple Process Model of Goal-directed Reaching Revisited

Recently our group forwarded a model of speed-accuracy relations in goal-directed reaching. A fundamental feature of our multiple process model was the distinction between two types of online regulation: impulse control and limb-target control. Impulse control begins during the initial stages of the movement trajectory and involves a comparison of actual limb velocity and direction to an internal representation of expectations about the limb trajectory. Limb-target control involves discrete error-reduction based on the relative positions of the limb and the target late in the movement. Our model also considers the role of eye movements, practice, energy optimization and strategic behavior in limb control. Here, we review recent work conducted to test specific aspects of our model. As well, we consider research not fully incorporated into our earlier contribution. We conclude that a slightly modified and expanded version of our model, that includes crosstalk between the two forms of online regulation, does an excellent job of explaining speed, accuracy, and energy optimization in goal-directed reaching

The effect of social context on the use of visual information

Social context modulates action kinematics. Less is known about whether social context also affects the use of task relevant visual information. We tested this hypothesis by examining whether the instruction to play table tennis competitively or cooperatively affected the kind of visual cues necessary for successful table tennis performance. In two experiments, participants played table tennis in a dark room with only the ball, net, and table visible. Visual information about both players’ actions was manipulated by means of self-glowing markers. We recorded the number of successful passes for each player individually. The results showed that participants’ performance increased when their own body was rendered visible in both the cooperative and the competitive condition. However, social context modulated the importance of different sources of visual information about the other player. In the cooperative condition, seeing the other player’s racket had the largest effects on performance increase, whereas in the competitive condition, seeing the other player’s body resulted in the largest performance increase. These results suggest that social context selectively modulates the use of visual information about others’ actions in social interactions

Contribution of retinal motion toward the impulse control of target-directed aiming

Contemporary models of sensorimotor control contend that visually-regulated movement adjustments may unfold early during a target-directed limb movement courtesy of an impulse control process that makes use of anticipatory forward models. To-date, evidence surrounding impulse control involves adjustments to a purported misperception in limb velocity following the unexpected onset of a moving background. That is, the limb is perceived to move faster and undershoots more whenever there is an incongruent moving background, and vice-versa. However, it can be argued that this particular behaviour may alternatively manifest from an independent oculo-manual-following response. The present study aimed to deconstruct these proposals, and with it, the processes that underlie impulse control. Participants had to rapidly reach upward to land their index finger accurately on a target. On 33% of trials, the background, over which the movement was made, moved in either the upward, downward, rightward, or leftward directions. Displacements within the primary and perpendicular directions of the movement showed spatial trajectories that were consistent with the directions of the moving backgrounds. This behaviour was most prevalent in measurements taken at the movements’ peak negative acceleration and endpoints. Moreover, the analysis of standardized displacements in the moving background conditions indicated no significant differences in the extent of the movements toward each of the moving backgrounds. These findings indicate that movement adjustments can manifest from an oculo-manual-following response rather than a misperception in limb velocity. We suggest that the anticipatory forward model that comprises impulse control may incorporate features of the environment that surround the vicinity of the limb

The Multiple Process Model of Goal-Directed Reaching Revisited

Recently our group forwarded a model of speed-accuracy relations in goal-directed reaching. A fundamental feature of our multiple process model was the distinction between two types of online regulation: impulse control and limb-target control. Impulse control begins during the initial stages of the movement trajectory and involves a comparison of actual limb velocity and direction to an internal representation of expectations about the limb trajectory. Limb-target control involves discrete error-reduction based on the relative positions of the limb and the target late in the movement. Our model also considers the role of eye movements, practice, energy optimization and strategic behavior in limb control. Here, we review recent work conducted to test specific aspects of our model. As well, we consider research not fully incorporated into our earlier contribution. We conclude that a slightly modified and expanded version of our model, that includes crosstalk between the two forms of online regulation, does an excellent job of explaining speed, accuracy, and energy optimization in goal-directed reaching

The multiple process model of goal-directed aiming/reaching: insights on limb control from various special populations

Several years ago, our research group forwarded a model of goal-directed reaching and aiming that describes the processes involved in the optimization of speed, accuracy, and energy expenditure Elliott et al. (Psychol Bull 136:1023–1044, 2010). One of the main features of the model is the distinction between early impulse control, which is based on a comparison of expected to perceived sensory consequences, and late limb-target control that involves a spatial comparison of limb and target position. Our model also emphasizes the importance of strategic behaviors that limit the opportunity for worst-case or inefficient outcomes. In the 2010 paper, we included a section on how our model can be used to understand atypical aiming/reaching movements in a number of special populations. In light of a recent empirical and theoretical update of our model Elliott et al. (Neurosci Biobehav Rev 72:95-110, 2017), here we consider contemporary motor control work involving typical aging, Down syndrome, autism spectrum disorder, and tetraplegia with tendon-transfer surgery. We outline how atypical limb control can be viewed within the context of the multiple-process model of goal-directed reaching and aiming, and discuss the underlying perceptual-motor impairment that results in the adaptive solution developed by the specific group