Concurrent adaptation of reactive saccades and hand pointing movements to equal and to opposite changes of target direction

Alternating Adaptation of Eye and Hand Movements to Opposite Directed Double Steps

Eye and hand movements can adapt to a variety of sensorimotor discordances. Studies on adaptation of movement directions suggest that the oculomotor and the hand motor system access the same adaptive mechanism related to the polarity of a discordance, because concurrent adaptations to opposite directed discordances strongly interfere. The authors scrutinized whether participants adapt their hand and eye movements to opposite directions (clockwise/counterclockwise) when both motor systems are alternatingly exposed to opposite directed double steps, and whether such adaptation is influenced by the allocation of effector to adaptation direction. The results showed that hand and eye movements adapted to opposite directions, but adaptation was biased to the counterclockwise direction. Aftereffects emerged nearly unbiased and independently for both motor systems. The authors conclude that the oculomotor and the hand motor system use independent mechanisms when they adapt to opposite polarities, although they interact during adaptation or concurrent performance.

Interference between adaptation to double steps and adaptation to rotated feedback in spite of differences in directional selectivity

Two key features of sensorimotor adaptation are the directional selectivity of adaptive changes and the interference of adaptations to opposite directions. The present study investigated whether directional selectivity and interference of adaptation are related to executive functions and whether these phenomena differ between two methods for visuomotor adaptation. Subjects adapted at three target directions to clockwise or counterclockwise rotated feedback or to clockwise or counterclockwise target displacements (double steps). Both adaptation methods induce rotations of movement trajectories into the same direction, but provide visual information differently. The results showed that adaptation progressed differently between three targets. When movements adapted clockwise, adaptation was best at the most clockwise located target, and when movements adapted counterclockwise, it was best at the most counterclockwise located target, suggesting that spatial generalization between target directions is related to the direction of motor adaptation. The two adaptation methods produced different adaptation patterns, which indicate a further impact of visual information. A second adaptation to the other and opposite-directed discordance was worse than naive adaptation and washed out the aftereffects from the first adaptation, confirming that both adaptation methods interfered. Executive functions were significant covariate for overall interference and interference of target-specific adaptation. The results suggest that directional selectivity of adaptation is shaped by the direction of motor adaptation and the visual information provided. The interference of both adaptation methods indicates that they share adaptive mechanisms for recalibration. The interference is the lower the better subjects are able to cognitively switch between tasks and to inhibit prepotent responses. Therefore, cognitive functions seem to be involved in the inhibition of non-adequate sensorimotor responses.

Concurrent directional adaptation of reactive saccades and hand movements to target displacements of different size

When eye and hand movements are concurrently aimed at double-step targets that call for equal and opposite changes of response direction (-10° for the eyes, +10° for the hand), adaptive recalibration of both motor systems is strongly attenuated; instead, hand but not eye movements are changed by corrective strategies (V. Grigorova et al., 2013a). The authors introduce a complementary paradigm, where double-step targets call for a -10° change of eye and a -30° change for hand movements. If compared to control subjects adapting only the eyes or only the hand, adaptive improvements were comparable for the eyes but were twice as large for the hand; in contrast, eye and hand aftereffects were comparable to those in control subjects. The authors concluded that concurrent exposure of eyes and hand to steps of the same direction but different size facilitated hand strategies, but didn't affect recalibration. This finding together with previous one (V. Grigorova et al., 2013a), suggests that concurrent adaptation of eyes and hand reveals different mechanisms of recalibration for step sign and step size, which are shared by reactive saccades and hand movements. However, hand mostly benefits from strategies provoked by the difference in target step sign and size.

Effects of old age and resource demand on double-step adaptation of saccadic eye movements

It is still unknown whether adaptation of saccades--like that of arm movements-deteriorates in the presence of a concurrent resource--demanding task, and whether it is affected by old age. We therefore compared double-step adaptation of saccade directions in young and older persons exposed to the adaptation task only (groups CY & CO), to the adaptation task and a spatially adjacent manual tracking task (AY & AO) or to the adaptation task and a spatially distant manual tracking task (DY & DO). Adaptation was similar in all groups except DO: the latter group showed no consistent adaptation and no adequate aftereffects. Tracking improved little by practice in all groups except AY, where the improvement was substantial. Our data therefore provide no evidence for an impact of old age and resource demand on saccadic adaptation, possibly because the neural substrate partly differs from that for arm adaptation. The lack of adaptation in DO probably reflects the well-known shrinkage of the functional field of view in old age.