Effect of visuo-proprioceptive mismatch rate on recalibration in hand perception.

Exp Brain Res

Department of Kinesiology, School of Public Health, Indiana University Bloomington, 1025 E. 7th St., PH 112, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA.

Published: September 2023

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study examines how our brains estimate hand position by using both visual and proprioceptive information, especially when there's a disconnect (mismatch) caused by tools like prisms or visual cursors.
  • Researchers tested three groups with different rates of mismatch (Slow, Medium, Fast) and found that faster mismatches led to greater recalibration of perceived hand position.
  • Unlike motor adaptation, which can continue adjusting with feedback, this study revealed that once a recalibration was established, no further adjustments occurred, highlighting different underlying processes at play.

Article Abstract

We estimate our hand's position by combining relevant visual and proprioceptive cues. A cross-sensory spatial mismatch can be created by viewing the hand through a prism or, more recently, rotating a visual cursor that represents hand position. This is often done in the context of target-directed reaching to study motor adaptation, the systematic updating of motor commands in response to a systematic movement error. However, a visuo-proprioceptive mismatch also elicits recalibration in the relationship between the hand's seen and felt position. The principles governing visuo-proprioceptive recalibration are poorly understood, compared to motor adaptation. For example, motor adaptation occurs robustly whether the cursor is rotated quickly or slowly, although the former may involve more explicit processes. Here, we asked whether visuo-proprioceptive recalibration, in the absence of motor adaptation, works the same way. Three groups experienced a 70 mm visuo-proprioceptive mismatch about their hand at a Slow, Medium, or Fast rate (0.84, 1.67, or 3.34 mm every two trials, respectively), with no error feedback. Once attained, the 70 mm mismatch was maintained for the remaining trials. Total recalibration differed significantly across groups, with the Fast, Medium, and Slow groups recalibrating 63.7, 56.3, and 42.8 mm on average, respectively. This suggests a slower mismatch rate may be less effective at eliciting recalibration. In contrast to motor adaptation studies, no further recalibration was observed in the maintenance phase. This may be related to the distinct mechanisms thought to contribute to perceptual recalibration via cross-sensory cue conflict versus sensory prediction errors.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11017161PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-023-06685-8DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

motor adaptation
20
visuo-proprioceptive mismatch
12
mismatch rate
8
recalibration
8
visuo-proprioceptive recalibration
8
motor
6
visuo-proprioceptive
5
mismatch
5
adaptation
5
rate recalibration
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!