Partitioning the components of visuomotor adaptation to prism-altered distance

Does Vergence Affect Perceived Size?

Since Kepler (1604) and Descartes (1637), it has been suggested that 'vergence' (the angular rotation of the eyes) plays a key role in size constancy. However, this has never been tested divorced from confounding cues such as changes in the retinal image. In our experiment, participants viewed a target which grew or shrank in size over 5 s. At the same time, the fixation distance specified by vergence was reduced from 50 to 25 cm. The question was whether this change in vergence affected the participants' judgements of whether the target grew or shrank in size? We found no evidence of any effect, and therefore no evidence that eye movements affect perceived size. If this is correct, then our finding has three implications. First, perceived size is much more reliant on cognitive influences than previously thought. This is consistent with the argument that visual scale is purely cognitive in nature (Linton, 2017; 2018). Second, it leads us to question whether the vergence modulation of V1 contributes to size constancy. Third, given the interaction between vergence, proprioception, and the retinal image in the Taylor illusion, it leads us to ask whether this cognitive approach could also be applied to multisensory integration.

Adaptation of pointing and visual localization in depth around the natural grasping distance

Vision in depth is distorted. A similar distortion can be observed for pointing to visual targets in depth. It has been suggested that pointing errors in depth reflect the visual distortion. Alternatively, pointing in depth might be guided by a prior that biases movements toward the natural grasping distance at which object manipulation is usually performed. To dissociate whether pointing is guided by distorted vision only or whether it takes into account a natural grasping distance prior, we adapted pointing movements. Participants received visual feedback about the success of their pointing once the movement was finished. We distorted the feedback to signal either that pointing was not far enough or in separate sessions that pointing was too far. Participants adapted to this artificial error by either extending or shortening their pointing movements. The generalization of pointing adaptation revealed a bias in movement planning that is inconsistent with pointing being guided only by distorted vision but with the involvement of knowledge about the natural grasping distance. Adaptation was strongest for pointing movements to a middle position that corresponds to the natural grasping distance and it was weakest for movements leading away from it. It has been demonstrated that pointing adaptation in depth changes visual perception (Volcic R, Fantoni C, Caudek C, Assad JA, Domini F. J Neurosci 33: 17081-17088, 2013). We also wondered how effects of pointing adaptation on visual space would generalize in depth. We found that adaptation changed visual space, but that this change was independent of the adaptation direction.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Which information guides pointing in 3D space? Inaccuracies of vision in depth generate the need for the sensorimotor system to rely on other information sources to optimally plan movement trajectories. Here, we implemented pointing adaptation experiments that could dissociate if the generalization of adaptation follows visual distortions or if it is informed by a "natural grasping distance" prior. Adaptation was strongest for movements toward the natural grasping distance, suggesting the latter hypothesis to be true.

Motor Program Transformation of Throwing Dart from the Third-Person Perspective

The perspective of perceiving one's action affects its speed and accuracy. In the present study, we investigated the change in accuracy and kinematics when subjects throw darts from the first-person perspective and the third-person perspective with varying angles of view. To model the third-person perspective, subjects were looking at themselves as well as the scene through the virtual reality head-mounted display (VR HMD). The scene was supplied by a video feed from the camera located to the up and 0, 20 and 40 degrees to the right behind the subjects. The 28 subjects wore a motion capture suit to register their right hand displacement, velocity and acceleration, as well as torso rotation during the dart throws. The results indicated that mean accuracy shifted in opposite direction with the changes of camera location in vertical axis and in congruent direction in horizontal axis. Kinematic data revealed a smaller angle of torso rotation to the left in all third-person perspective conditions before and during the throw. The amplitude, speed and acceleration in third-person condition were lower compared to the first-person view condition, before the peak velocity of the hand in the direction toward the target and after the peak velocity in lowering the hand. Moreover, the hand movement angle was smaller in the third-person perspective conditions with 20 and 40 angle of view, compared with the first-person perspective condition just preceding the time of peak velocity, and the difference between conditions predicted the changes in mean accuracy of the throws. Thus, the results of this study revealed that subject's localization contributed to the transformation of the motor program.

An Optimal Measurement of Fixation Disparity Using Ogle's Apparatus

PURPOSE

Fixation disparity (FD) is a small misalignment of the eyes within the normal alignment when viewing under binocular condition. Ogle's apparatus measures FD. Standards of procedures vary, which may lead to different outcomes.

METHODS

Students with normal ocular alignment, stereopsis ≤60 seconds of arc and visual acuity <0.1 logMAR, were included in this prospective comparative study. Four procedures (P1-P4) of measuring FD with Ogle's apparatus were performed with divergent placement of the line (P1 and P3), or the line moving from subjective zero (P1 and P2: prisms of ascending strength; P3 and P4: prisms alternating base in base out; combined and P4). Differences in the FD curve were determined by looking at point zero, motor fusion amplitude, and the degree of FD.

RESULTS

Twenty-six participants were examined by these 4 procedures. Point zero showed a significant difference between P1-P2 (P=0.006) and P3-P4 (P=0.001). P1 and P3 indicated the highest point zero: median of -1 and -1.5 minutes of arc exodisparity. Motor fusion amplitude showed a significant difference between P1-P2 (P=0.037), P1-P3 (P=0.004), and P2-P4 (P=0.002). P1 revealed the highest motor fusion amplitude (median of 34Δ) and P4 the lowest amplitude (median of 28Δ). No significant differences were found in esodisparity. In exodisparity there was a significant difference comparing P1-P2 (P=0.000), P3-P4 (P=0.000), and P1-P3 (P=0.021). P1 gave the highest exodisparity (median 22 minutes of arc) and P4 the lowest (median 10 minutes of arc).

CONCLUSION

Clinically relevant differences were found in exodisparity, mainly caused by difference in line shifting. Exodisparity was significantly lower, moving the line from subjective zero. The most accurate procedure is using prisms of ascending strength combined with divergent placement of the line (P1). These findings standardize a reliable procedure of measuring the FD curve for clinical use. Patients will not be misdiagnosed with reduced FD.

Temporally stable adaptation is robust, incomplete and specific

Sensorimotor adaptation, the process that reduces movement errors by learning from sensory feedback, is often studied within a session of about half an hour. Within such a single session, adaptation generally reaches plateau before errors are completely removed. However, adaptation may complete on longer timescales: the slow components of error‐based adaptation are associated with good retention. In this study, we tested how adaptation evolves over time by asking participants to perform six adaptation sessions on different days. In these sessions, participants performed a three‐dimensional reaching task while visual feedback about endpoint errors was rotated around the cyclopean eye. In addition, context specificity of the adaptation was addressed by measuring inter‐limb transfer and transfer to visual and proprioceptive perceptual tasks. We show that from the second session on, the adaptation was retained almost completely across sessions. However, after six learning sessions, adaptation still reached plateau before errors were completely removed. The adaptation was specific: the adaptation did neither transfer to the other hand, nor to the visual, and only marginally to the proprioceptive perceptual estimates. We conclude that motor adaptation is robust, specific and incomplete.

Visuomotor adaptation needs a validation of prediction error by feedback error

The processes underlying short-term plasticity induced by visuomotor adaptation to a shifted visual field are still debated. Two main sources of error can induce motor adaptation: reaching feedback errors, which correspond to visually perceived discrepancies between hand and target positions, and errors between predicted and actual visual reafferences of the moving hand. These two sources of error are closely intertwined and difficult to disentangle, as both the target and the reaching limb are simultaneously visible. Accordingly, the goal of the present study was to clarify the relative contributions of these two types of errors during a pointing task under prism-displaced vision. In “terminal feedback error” condition, viewing of their hand by subjects was allowed only at movement end, simultaneously with viewing of the target. In “movement prediction error” condition, viewing of the hand was limited to movement duration, in the absence of any visual target, and error signals arose solely from comparisons between predicted and actual reafferences of the hand. In order to prevent intentional corrections of errors, a subthreshold, progressive stepwise increase in prism deviation was used, so that subjects remained unaware of the visual deviation applied in both conditions. An adaptive aftereffect was observed in the “terminal feedback error” condition only. As far as subjects remained unaware of the optical deviation and self-assigned pointing errors, prediction error alone was insufficient to induce adaptation. These results indicate a critical role of hand-to-target feedback error signals in visuomotor adaptation; consistent with recent neurophysiological findings, they suggest that a combination of feedback and prediction error signals is necessary for eliciting aftereffects. They also suggest that feedback error updates the prediction of reafferences when a visual perturbation is introduced gradually and cognitive factors are eliminated or strongly attenuated.

Alignment to natural and imposed mismatches between the senses

Does the nervous system continuously realign the senses so that objects are seen and felt in the same place? Conflicting answers to this question have been given. Research imposing a sensory mismatch has provided evidence that the nervous system realigns the senses to reduce the mismatch. Other studies have shown that when subjects point with the unseen hand to visual targets, their end points show visual-proprioceptive biases that do not disappear after episodes of visual feedback. These biases are indicative of intersensory mismatches that the nervous system does not align for. Here, we directly compare how the nervous system deals with natural and imposed mismatches. Subjects moved a hand-held cube to virtual cubes appearing at pseudorandom locations in three-dimensional space. We alternated blocks in which subjects moved without visual feedback of the hand with feedback blocks in which we rendered a cube representing the hand-held cube. In feedback blocks, we rotated the visual feedback by 5° relative to the subject's head, creating an imposed mismatch between vision and proprioception on top of any natural mismatches. Realignment occurred quickly but was incomplete. We found more realignment to imposed mismatches than to natural mismatches. We propose that this difference is related to the way in which the visual information changed when subjects entered the experiment: the imposed mismatches were different from the mismatch in daily life, so alignment started from scratch, whereas the natural mismatches were not imposed by the experimenter, so subjects are likely to have entered the experiment partly aligned.

How perceived egocentric distance varies with changes in tonic vergence

According to the eye muscle potentiation (EMP) hypothesis, sustained vergence leads to changes in egocentric perceived distance. This perceptual effect has been attributed to a change in the resting or tonic state of vergence. The goal of the present study was to test the EMP hypothesis by quantifying the relationship between prism-induced changes in tonic vergence and corresponding changes in perceived distance and by measuring the dynamics of changes in perceived distance. During a 10-min exposure to 5-diopter base-out prisms that increased the vergence demand, thirteen right-handed subjects pointed to visual targets located within reaching space using their left hand, without visual feedback. Pre- and post-exposure tests assessed tonic vergence through phoria measurements and egocentric distance estimate through pointing to visual targets with each hand successively, without visual feedback. Similar distance aftereffects were observed for both hands, although only the left hand was used during exposure, indicating that these aftereffects are mediated by visual processes rather than by visuomotor interactions. The distance aftereffects were significantly correlated with prism-induced changes in phoria, demonstrating a relationship between perceived distance and the level of tonic vergence. Changes in perceived distance increased monotonically across trials during prism exposure and remained stable during the post-test, indicating a long time constant for these perceptual effects, consistent with current models of the vergence control system. Overall, these results support the hypothesis that vergence plays a role in reduced-cue distance perception. They further illustrate that variations in tonic vergence influence perceived distance by altering the sensed vergence effort.