Opposed optimal strategies of weighting somatosensory inputs for planning reaching movements toward visual and proprioceptive targets

The role of explicit knowledge in compensating for a visuo-proprioceptive cue conflict

It is unclear how explicit knowledge of an externally imposed mismatch between visual and proprioceptive cues of hand position affects perceptual recalibration. The Bayesian causal inference framework might suggest such knowledge should abolish the visual and proprioceptive recalibration that occurs when individuals perceive these cues as coming from the same source (their hand), while the visuomotor adaptation literature suggests explicit knowledge of a cue conflict does not eliminate implicit compensatory processes. Here we compared visual and proprioceptive recalibration in three groups with varying levels of knowledge about the visuo-proprioceptive cue conflict. All participants estimated the position of visual, proprioceptive, or combined targets related to their left index fingertip, with a 70 mm visuo-proprioceptive offset gradually imposed. Groups 1, 2, and 3 received no information, medium information, and high information, respectively, about the offset. Information was manipulated using instructional and visual cues. All groups performed the task similarly at baseline in terms of variance, weighting, and integration. Results suggest the three groups recalibrated vision and proprioception differently, but there was no difference in variance or weighting. Participants who received only instructional cues about the mismatch (Group 2) did not recalibrate less, on average, than participants provided no information about the mismatch (Group 1). However, participants provided instructional cues and extra visual cues of their hands during the perturbation (Group 3) demonstrated significantly less recalibration than other groups. These findings are consistent with the idea that instructional cues alone are insufficient to override participants' intrinsic belief in common cause and reduce recalibration.

Reliability of on-line visual feedback influences learning of continuous motor task of healthy young adults

A continuous task was used to determine how the reliability of on-line visual feedback during acquisition impacts motor learning. Participants performed a right hand pointing task of a repeated sequence with a visual cursor that was either reliable, moderately unreliable, or largely unreliable. Delayed retention tests were administered 24 h later, as well as intermanual transfer tests (performed with the left hand). A visuospatial transfer test was performed with the same targets' sequence (same visuospatial configuration) while a motor transfer test was performed with the visual mirror of the targets' sequence (same motor patterns). Results showed that pointing was slower and long-term learning disrupted in the largely unreliable visual cursor condition, compared with the reliable and moderately unreliable conditions. Also, analysis of transfers revealed classically better performance on visuospatial transfer than on motor transfer for the reliable condition. However, here we first show that such difference disappears when the cursor was moderately or largely unreliable. Interestingly, these results indicated a difference in the type of sequence coding, depending on the reliability of the on-line visual feedback. This recourse to mixed coding opens up interesting perspectives, as it is known to promote better learning of motor sequences.

Visual feedback and age affect upper limb reaching accuracy and kinematics in immersive virtual reality among healthy adults

This cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the effect of visual feedback, age and movement repetition on the upper limb (UL) accuracy and kinematics during a reaching task in immersive virtual reality (VR). Fifty-one healthy participants were asked to perform 25 trials of a reaching task in immersive VR with and without visual feedback of their hand. They were instructed to place, as accurately and as fast as possible, a controller held in their non-dominant hand in the centre of a virtual red cube of 3 cm side length. For each trial, the end-point error (distance between the tip of the controller and the centre of the cube), a coefficient of linearity (CL), the movement time (MT), and the spectral arc length of the velocity signal (SPARC), which is a movement smoothness index, were calculated. Multivariate analyses of variance were conducted to assess the influence of visual feedback, age and trial repetition on the average end-point error, SPARC, CL and MT, and their time course throughout the 25 trials. Providing visual feedback of the hand reduced average end-point error ( P  < 0.001) and MT ( P  = 0.044), improved SPARC ( P  < 0.001) but did not affect CL ( P  = 0.07). Younger participants obtained a lower mean end-point error ( P  = 0.037), a higher SPARC ( P  = 0.021) and CL ( P  = 0.013). MT was not affected by age ( P  = 0.671). Trial repetition increased SPARC ( P  < 0.001) and CL ( P  < 0.001), and reduced MT ( P  = 0.001) but did not affect end-point error ( P  = 0.608). In conclusion, the results of this study demonstrated that providing visual feedback of the hand and being younger improves UL accuracy and movement smoothness in immersive VR. UL kinematics but not accuracy can be improved with more trial repetitions. These findings could guide the future development of protocols in clinical rehabilitation and research.

Cortical facilitation of tactile afferents during the preparation of a body weight transfer when standing on a biomimetic surface

Self-generated movement shapes tactile perception, but few studies have investigated the brain mechanisms involved in the processing of the mechanical signals related to the static and transient skin deformations generated by forces and pressures exerted between the foot skin and the standing surface. We recently found that standing on a biomimetic surface (i.e., inspired by the characteristics of mechanoreceptors and skin dermatoglyphics), that magnified skin-surface interaction, increased the sensory flow to the somatosensory cortex and improved balance control compared to standing on control (e.g., smooth) surfaces. In this study, we tested whether the well-known sensory suppression that occurs during movements is alleviated when the tactile afferent signal becomes relevant with the use of a biomimetic surface. Eyes-closed participants (n = 25) self-stimulated their foot cutaneous receptors by shifting their body weight toward one of their legs while standing on either a biomimetic or a control (smooth) surface. In a control task, similar forces were exerted on the surfaces (i.e., similar skin-surface interaction) by passive translations of the surfaces. Sensory gating was assessed by measuring the amplitude of the somatosensory-evoked potential over the vertex (SEP, recorded by EEG). Significantly larger and shorter SEPs were found when participants stood on the biomimetic surface. This was observed whether the forces exerted on the surface were self-generated or passively generated. Contrary to our prediction, we found that the sensory attenuation related to the self-generated movement did not significantly differ between the biomimetic and control surfaces. However, we observed an increase in gamma activity (30-50 Hz) over centroparietal regions during the preparation phase of the weight shift only when participants stood on the biomimetic surface. This result might suggest that gamma-band oscillations play an important functional role in processing behaviorally relevant stimuli during the early stages of body weight transfer.

Conscious awareness of a visuo-proprioceptive mismatch: Effect on cross-sensory recalibration

The brain estimates hand position using vision and position sense (proprioception). The relationship between visual and proprioceptive estimates is somewhat flexible: visual information about the index finger can be spatially displaced from proprioceptive information, resulting in cross-sensory recalibration of the visual and proprioceptive unimodal position estimates. According to the causal inference framework, recalibration occurs when the unimodal estimates are attributed to a common cause and integrated. If separate causes are perceived, then recalibration should be reduced. Here we assessed visuo-proprioceptive recalibration in response to a gradual visuo-proprioceptive mismatch at the left index fingertip. Experiment 1 asked how frequently a 70 mm mismatch is consciously perceived compared to when no mismatch is present, and whether awareness is linked to reduced visuo-proprioceptive recalibration, consistent with causal inference predictions. However, conscious offset awareness occurred rarely. Experiment 2 tested a larger displacement, 140 mm, and asked participants about their perception more frequently, including at 70 mm. Experiment 3 confirmed that participants were unbiased at estimating distances in the 2D virtual reality display. Results suggest that conscious awareness of the mismatch was indeed linked to reduced cross-sensory recalibration as predicted by the causal inference framework, but this was clear only at higher mismatch magnitudes (70–140 mm). At smaller offsets (up to 70 mm), conscious perception of an offset may not override unconscious belief in a common cause, perhaps because the perceived offset magnitude is in range of participants’ natural sensory biases. These findings highlight the interaction of conscious awareness with multisensory processes in hand perception.

Older adults rely on somatosensory information from the effector limb in the planning of discrete movements to somatosensory cues

While younger and older adults can perform upper-limb reaches to spatial targets with comparable endpoint accuracy (i.e., Helsen et al., 2016; Goodman et al., 2020), movement planning (i.e., reaction time) is significantly longer in older versus younger adults (e.g., Pohl et al., 1996; Goodman et al., 2020). Critically relevant to the current study, age-related differences in reaction time are even greater when older adults plan movement towards somatosensory versus visual or bimodal targets in the absence of vision of the moving limb (e.g., Goodman et al., 2020). One proposed explanation of these lengthened reaction times to somatosensory targets is that older adults may be experiencing challenges in implementing sensorimotor transformations when planning discrete movements of their unseen limb. To test this idea and assess the contributions of somatosensory information to these motor planning processes, tendon vibration was applied to the muscles of the effector limb between reaching movements made towards visual, somatosensory, or bimodal targets. The results revealed that older adults show the greatest increases in reaction times when vibration was applied during the preparation of movements to somatosensory targets. Further, both older and younger adults exhibited decreased movement endpoint precision when tendon vibration was applied. However, only older adults showed significantly lower movement endpoint precision due to tendon vibration when making movements to somatosensory targets, versus both visual and bimodal targets. These results corroborate previous evidence that older adults have difficulties planning upper-limb movements to somatosensory targets. As well, these results yielded novel evidence that such motor planning processes in older adult rely on somatosensory cues from the effector limb.

Somatosensory target information is used for reaching but not for saccadic eye movements

A systematic investigation of contributions of different somatosensory modalities (proprioception, kinesthesia, tactile) for goal-directed movements is missing. Here we demonstrate that while eye movements are not affected by different types of somatosensory information, reach precision improves when two different types of information are available. Moreover, reach accuracy and gaze precision to unseen somatosensory targets improve when performing coordinated eye-hand movements, suggesting bidirectional contributions of efferent information in reach and eye movement control.

Auditory cues for somatosensory targets invoke visuomotor transformations: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence

Prior to goal-directed actions, somatosensory target positions can be localized using either an exteroceptive or an interoceptive body representation. The goal of the present study was to investigate if the body representation selected to plan reaches to somatosensory targets is influenced by the sensory modality of the cue indicating the target’s location. In the first experiment, participants reached to somatosensory targets prompted by either an auditory or a vibrotactile cue. As a baseline condition, participants also performed reaches to visual targets prompted by an auditory cue. Gaze-dependent reaching errors were measured to determine the contribution of the exteroceptive representation to motor planning processes. The results showed that reaches to both auditory-cued somatosensory targets and auditory-cued visual targets exhibited larger gaze-dependent reaching errors than reaches to vibrotactile-cued somatosensory targets. Thus, an exteroceptive body representation was likely used to plan reaches to auditory-cued somatosensory targets but not to vibrotactile-cued somatosensory targets. The second experiment examined the influence of using an exteroceptive body representation to plan movements to somatosensory targets on pre-movement neural activations. Cortical responses to a task-irrelevant visual flash were measured as participants planned movements to either auditory-cued somatosensory or auditory-cued visual targets. Larger responses (i.e., visual-evoked potentials) were found when participants planned movements to somatosensory vs. visual targets, and source analyses revealed that these activities were localized to the left occipital and left posterior parietal areas. These results suggest that visual and visuomotor processing networks were more engaged when using the exteroceptive body representation to plan movements to somatosensory targets, than when planning movements to external visual targets.

Spatial bias in estimating the position of visual and proprioceptive targets

When people match an unseen hand to a visual or proprioceptive target, they make both variable and systematic (bias) errors. Variance is a well-established factor in behavior, but the origin and implications of bias, and its connection to variance, are poorly understood. Eighty healthy adults matched their unseen right index finger to proprioceptive (left index finger) and visual targets with no performance feedback. We asked whether matching bias was related to target modality and to the magnitude or spatial properties of matching variance. Bias errors were affected by target modality, with subjects estimating visual and proprioceptive targets 20 mm apart. We found three pieces of evidence to suggest a connection between bias and variable errors: 1) for most subjects, the target modality that yielded greater spatial bias was also estimated with greater variance; 2) magnitudes of matching bias and variance were somewhat correlated for each target modality ( R = 0.24 and 0.29); and 3) bias direction was closely related to the angle of the major axis of the confidence ellipse ( R = 0.60 and 0.63). However, whereas variance was significantly correlated with visuo-proprioceptive weighting as predicted by multisensory integration theory ( R = -0.29 and 0.27 for visual and proprioceptive variance, respectively), bias was not. In a second session, subjects improved their matching variance, but not bias, for both target modalities, indicating a difference in stability. Taken together, these results suggest bias and variance are related only in some respects, which should be considered in the study of multisensory behavior. NEW & NOTEWORTHY People matching visual or proprioceptive targets make both variable and systematic (bias) errors. Multisensory integration is thought to minimize variance, but if the less variable modality has more bias, behavioral accuracy will decrease. Our data set suggests this is unusual. However, although bias and variable errors were spatially related, they differed in both stability and correlation with multisensory weighting. This suggests the bias-variance relationship is not straightforward, and both should be considered in multisensory behavior.

The visual encoding of purely proprioceptive intermanual tasks is due to the need of transforming joint signals, not to their interhemispheric transfer

To perform goal-oriented hand movement, humans combine multiple sensory signals (e.g., vision and proprioception) that can be encoded in various reference frames (body centered and/or exo-centered). In a previous study (Tagliabue M, McIntyre J. PLoS One 8: e68438, 2013), we showed that, when aligning a hand to a remembered target orientation, the brain encodes both target and response in visual space when the target is sensed by one hand and the response is performed by the other, even though both are sensed only through proprioception. Here we ask whether such visual encoding is due 1) to the necessity of transferring sensory information across the brain hemispheres, or 2) to the necessity, due to the arms' anatomical mirror symmetry, of transforming the joint signals of one limb into the reference frame of the other. To answer this question, we asked subjects to perform purely proprioceptive tasks in different conditions: Intra, the same arm sensing the target and performing the movement; Inter/Parallel, one arm sensing the target and the other reproducing its orientation; and Inter/Mirror, one arm sensing the target and the other mirroring its orientation. Performance was very similar between Intra and Inter/Mirror (conditions not requiring joint-signal transformations), while both differed from Inter/Parallel. Manipulation of the visual scene in a virtual reality paradigm showed visual encoding of proprioceptive information only in the latter condition. These results suggest that the visual encoding of purely proprioceptive tasks is not due to interhemispheric transfer of the proprioceptive information per se, but to the necessity of transforming joint signals between mirror-symmetric limbs.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Why does the brain encode goal-oriented, intermanual tasks in a visual space, even in the absence of visual feedback about the target and the hand? We show that the visual encoding is not due to the transfer of proprioceptive signals between brain hemispheres per se, but to the need, due to the mirror symmetry of the two limbs, of transforming joint angle signals of one arm in different joint signals of the other.

Calibration of the Leg Muscle Responses Elicited by Predictable Perturbations of Stance and the Effect of Vision

Motor adaptation due to task practice implies a gradual shift from deliberate control of behavior to automatic processing, which is less resource- and effort-demanding. This is true both for deliberate aiming movements and for more stereotyped movements such as locomotion and equilibrium maintenance. Balance control under persisting critical conditions would require large conscious and motor effort in the absence of gradual modification of the behavior. We defined time-course of kinematic and muscle features of the process of adaptation to repeated, predictable perturbations of balance eliciting both reflex and anticipatory responses. Fifty-nine sinusoidal (10 cm, 0.6 Hz) platform displacement cycles were administered to 10 subjects eyes-closed (EC) and eyes-open (EO). Head and Center of Mass (CoM) position, ankle angle and Tibialis Anterior (TA) and Soleus (Sol) EMG were assessed. EMG bursts were classified as reflex or anticipatory based on the relationship between burst amplitude and ankle angular velocity. Muscle activity decreased over time, to a much larger extent for TA than Sol. The attenuation was larger for the reflex than the anticipatory responses. Regardless of muscle activity attenuation, latency of muscle bursts and peak-to-peak CoM displacement did not change across perturbation cycles. Vision more than doubled speed and the amount of EMG adaptation particularly for TA activity, rapidly enhanced body segment coordination, and crucially reduced head displacement. The findings give new insight on the mode of amplitude- and time-modulation of motor output during adaptation in a balancing task, advocate a protocol for assessing flexibility of balance strategies, and provide a reference for addressing balance problems in patients with movement disorders.

Initial information prior to movement onset influences kinematics of upward arm pointing movements

To elaborate a motor plan and perform online control in the gravity field, the brain relies on priors and multisensory integration of information. In particular, afferent and efferent inputs related to the initial state are thought to convey sensorimotor information to plan the upcoming action. Yet it is still unclear to what extent these cues impact motor planning. Here we examined the role of initial information on the planning and execution of arm movements. Participants performed upward arm movements around the shoulder at three speeds and in two arm conditions. In the first condition, the arm was outstretched horizontally and required a significant muscular command to compensate for the gravitational shoulder torque before movement onset. In contrast, in the second condition the arm was passively maintained in the same position with a cushioned support and did not require any muscle contraction before movement execution. We quantified differences in motor performance by comparing shoulder velocity profiles. Previous studies showed that asymmetric velocity profiles reflect an optimal integration of the effects of gravity on upward movements. Consistent with this, we found decreased acceleration durations in both arm conditions. However, early differences in kinematic asymmetries and EMG patterns between the two conditions signaled a change of the motor plan. This different behavior carried on through trials when the arm was at rest before movement onset and may reveal a distinct motor strategy chosen in the context of uncertainty. Altogether, we suggest that the information available online must be complemented by accurate initial information.

Prediction in the Vestibular Control of Arm Movements

The contribution of vestibular signals to motor control has been evidenced in postural, locomotor, and oculomotor studies. Here, we review studies showing that vestibular information also contributes to the control of arm movements during whole-body motion. The data reviewed suggest that vestibular information is used by the arm motor system to maintain the initial hand position or the planned hand trajectory unaltered during body motion. This requires integration of vestibular and cervical inputs to determine the trunk motion dynamics. These studies further suggest that the vestibular control of arm movement relies on rapid and efficient vestibulomotor transformations that cannot be considered automatic. We also reviewed evidence suggesting that the vestibular afferents can be used by the brain to predict and counteract body-rotation-induced torques (e.g., Coriolis) acting on the arm when reaching for a target while turning the trunk.

Anchoring the "floating arm": Use of proprioceptive and mirror visual feedback from one arm to control involuntary displacement of the other arm

Arm movement control takes advantage of multiple inputs, including those originating from the contralateral arm. In the mirror paradigm, it has been suggested that control of the unseen arm, hidden by the mirror, is facilitated by the reflection of the other, moving arm. Although proprioceptive feedback originating from the moving arm, (the image of which is reflected in the mirror), is always coupled with visual feedback in the mirror paradigm, the former has received little attention. We recently showed that the involuntary arm movement following a sustained, isometric contraction, known as the "floating arm" or "Kohnstamm phenomenon", was adjusted to the passive-motorized displacement of the other arm. However, provision of mirror feedback, that is, the reflection in the mirror of the passively moved arm, did not add to this coupling effect. Therefore, the interlimb coupling in the mirror paradigm may to a large extent have a proprioceptive origin rather than a visual origin. The objective of the present study was to decouple mirror feedback and proprioceptive feedback from the reflected, moving arm and evaluate their respective contributions to interlimb coupling in the mirror paradigm. First (in Experiment 1, under eyes-closed conditions), we found that masking the proprioceptive afferents of the passively moved arm (by co-vibrating the antagonistic biceps and triceps muscles) suppressed the interlimb coupling between involuntary displacement of one arm and passive displacement of the other. Next (in Experiment 2), we masked proprioceptive afferents of the passively moved arm and specifically evaluated mirror feedback. We found that interlimb coupling through mirror feedback (though significant) was weaker than interlimb coupling through proprioceptive feedback. Overall, the present results show that in the mirror paradigm, proprioceptive feedback is stronger and more consistent than visual-mirror feedback in terms of the impact on interlimb coupling.