Abstract
The presence of after-effects in adaptation tasks implies that an existing internal model has been updated. Previously, we showed that although observers adapted to a visuomotor perturbation, they did not show after-effects. In this experiment, we tested 2 further observer groups and an actor group. Observers were now actively engaged in watching (encouraged through imagery and movement estimation), with one group physically practising for 25% of the trials (mixed). Participants estimated the hand movements that produced various cursor trajectories and/or their own hand movement from a preceding trial. These trials also allowed us to assess the development of explicit knowledge as a function of the three practice conditions. The pure observation group did not show after-effects, whereas the actor and mixed groups did. The pure observation group improved their ability to estimate hand movement of the video model. Although the actor and mixed groups improved in actual reaching accuracy, they did not improve in explicit estimation. The mixed group was more accurate in reaching during adaptation and showed larger after-effects than the actors. We suggest that observation encourages an explicit mode of learning, enabling performance benefits without corresponding changes to an internal model of the mapping between output and sensory input. However, some physical practice interspersed with observation can change the manner with which learning is achieved, encouraging implicit learning and the updating of an existing internal model.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
One participant was excluded at the analyses stage due to unusually large pretest aiming error.
A Calcomp Drawing Board III (225 Hz, 200 lines/cm resolution) was used for data collection for the OBS and ACT groups. Due to a malfunction after testing these groups, a new version of the tablet was used for the MIX group. The main difference between these tablets was that a custom-made pointing device was used with the first tablet, allowing for movements of the index finger on the tablet (with the mouse attached to the top of the hand). However, this custom-made device was not compatible with the new tablet, such that a new mouse was constructed that had a plastic extension with cross-hairs for placement of the index finger. Both devices were calibrated before testing, and pilot testing ensured that pretest errors (i.e. normal aiming) were not significantly different across the 3 groups.
To determine whether the requirement to estimate their own hand trajectory impacted errors for the ACT group, we compared this group’s performance to a previous group who practised with vision of the hand and cursor in a previous experiment (Ong and Hodges 2010). A 2 Group × 8 Block ANOVA yielded no significant group-related effects, both Fs < 1.
References
Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Bernier P, Chua R, Bard C, Franks I (2006) Updating of an internal model without proprioception: a deafferentation study. Neuroreport 17:1421–1425
Bird G, Heyes C (2005) Effector-dependent learning by observation of a finger movement sequence. J Exp Psychol HPP 31:262–275
Bird G, Osman M, Saggerson A, Heyes C (2005) Sequence learning by action, observation and action observation. Br J Psychol 96:371–388
Boutin A, Fries U, Panzer S, Blandin Y, Shea CH (2010) Role of action observation and action in sequences learning and coding. Acta Psychol 135:240–251
Brown LE, Wilson ET, Gribble PL (2009) Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to the primary motor cortex interferes with motor learning by observing. J Cogn Neurosci 21:1013–1022
Carroll WR, Bandura A (1990) Representational guidance of action production in observational learning: a causal analysis. J Mot Behav 22:85–97
Clark S, Tremblay F, Ste-Marie D (2003) Differential modulation of corticospinal excitability during observation, mental imagery and imitation of hand actions. Neuropsychologia 42:105–112
Clower DM, Boussaoud D (2000) Selective use of perceptual recalibration versus visuomotor skill acquisition. J Neurophys 84:2703–2708
Fadiga L, Buccino G, Craighero L, Fogassi L, Gallese V, Pavesi G (1999) Corticospinal excitability is specifically modulated by motor imagery: a magnetic stimulation study. Neuropsychologia 37:147–158
Flanagan J, Vetter P, Johansson R, Wolpert D (2003) Prediction precedes control in motor learning. Curr Biol 13:146–150
Gallese V, Fadiga L, Fogassi L, Rizzolatti G (1996) Action recognition in the premotor cortex. Brain 119:593–609
Gentile AM (1998) Implicit and explicit processes during acquisition of functional skills. Scand J Occup Ther 5:7–16
Gentili R, Papaxanthis C, Pozzo T (2006) Improvement and generalization of arm motor performance through motor imagery practice. Neuroscience 137:761–772
Gruetzmatcher N, Panzer S, Blandin Y, Shea CH (2011) Observation and physical practice: coding of simple motor sequences. Q J Exp Psychol 64:1111–1123
Hall CR, Martin KA (1997) Measuring movement imagery abilities: a revision of the movement imagery questionnaire. J Ment Imag 21:143–154
Heyes C, Foster CL (2002) Motor learning by observation: evidence from a serial reaction time task. Q J Exp Psychol 55A:593–607
Hodges NJ, Franks IM (2002) Modelling coaching practice: the role of instruction and demonstration. J Sports Sci 20:1–19
Holmes P, Calmels C (2008) A neuroscientific review of imagery and observation use in sport. J Mot Behav 40:433–445
Howard JR, Mutter SA, Howard DV (1992) Serial pattern learning by event observation. J Exp Psychol LMC 18:1029–1039
Hwang EJ, Smith MA, Shadmehr R (2006) Dissociable effects of the implicit and explicit memory systems on learning control of reaching. Exp Brain Res 173:425–437
Jeannerod M (2001) Neural simulation of action: a unifying mechanism for motor cognition. NeuroImage 14:S103–S109
Jeannerod M (2006) Motor cognition: what actions tell the self. Oxford University Press, NY
Kelly SW, Burton AM, Riedel B, Lynch E (2003) Sequence learning by action and observation: evidence for separate mechanisms. Br J Psychol 94:355–372
Larssen B, Ong N, Hodges NJ (in review) Watch and learn: seeing is better than doing when acquiring consecutive motor tasks. PLoS One
Mattar AAG, Gribble PL (2005) Motor learning by observing. Neuron 46:153–160
Mazzoni P, Krakauer JW (2006) An implicit plan overrides an explicit strategy during visuomotor adaptation. J Neurosci 26:3642–3645
Miall R, Wolpert D (1996) Forward models for physiological motor control. Neural Netw 9:1265–1279
Ong NT, Hodges NJ (2010) Absence of after-effects for observers after watching a visuomotor adaptation. Exp Brain Res 205:325–334
Ram N, Riggs SM, Skaling S, Landers DM, McCullagh P (2007) A comparison of modelling and imagery in the acquisition and retention of motor skills. J Sports Sci 25:587–597
Redding GM, Wallace B (1993) Adaptive coordination and alignment of eye and hand. J Mot Behav 25:75–88
Redding GM, Wallace B (2002) Strategic calibration and spatial alignment: a model from prism adaptation. J Mot Behav 34:126–138
Rizzolatti G, Fadiga L, Gallese V, Fogassi L (1996) Premotor cortex and the recognition of motor actions. Cogn Brain Res 3:131–141
Shadmehr R, Mussa-Ivaldi F (1994) Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task. J Neurosci 14:3208–3224
Shea CH, Wright DL, Wulf G, Whitacre C (2000) Physical and observational practice afford unique learning opportunities. J Mot Behav 32:27–36
Smith MA, Ghazizadeh A, Shadmehr R (2006) Interacting adaptive processes with different timescales underlie short-term motor learning. PLoS Biol 4:e179
Strafella AP, Paus T (2000) Modulation of cortical excitability during action observation: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Neuroreport 11:2289–2292
Vidoni ED, Boyd LA (2007) Achieving enlightenment: what do we know about the implicit learning system and its interaction with explicit knowledge? J Neurol Phys Ther 31:145–154
Wang J, Joshi M, Lei Y (2011) The extent of interlimb transfer following adaptation to a novel visuomotor condition does not depend on awareness of the condition. J Neurophysiol 106:259–264
Welch RB (1986) Adaptation of space perception. In: Boff KR, Kaufmam L, Thomas JP (eds) Handbook of perception and human performance, vol 1. Wiley–Interscience, NY, pp 241–245
Williams J, Pearce AJ, Loporto M, Morris T, Holmes PS (2012) The relationship between corticospinal excitability during motor imagery and motor imagery ability. Behav Brain Res 226:369–375
Willingham DB, Goedert-Eschmann K (1999) The relation between implicit and explicit learning: evidence for parallel development. Psychol Sci 10:531–534
Wolpert D (1997) Computational approaches to motor control. Trends Cogn Sci 1:209–216
Wolpert DM, Kawato M (1998) Multiple paired forward and inverse models for motor control. Neural Netw 11:1317–1329
Wolpert D, Ghahramani Z, Jordan M (1995) An internal model for sensorimotor integration. Science 269:1880–1882
Zhang L, Ma Q, Orlick T, Zitzelsberger L (1992) The effect of mental-imagery training on performance enhancement with 7–10-year-old children. Sport Psychol 6:230–241
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by a Discovery grant to the final author from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ong, N.T., Larssen, B.C. & Hodges, N.J. In the absence of physical practice, observation and imagery do not result in updating of internal models for aiming. Exp Brain Res 218, 9–19 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-011-2996-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-011-2996-1