The explicit/implicit distinction in studies of visuomotor learning: Conceptual and methodological pitfalls

Imprecise perception of hand position during early motor adaptation

Localizing one's body parts is important for movement control and motor learning. Recent studies have shown that the precision with which people localize their hand places constraints on motor adaptation. Although these studies have assumed that hand localization remains equally precise across learning, we show that precision decreases rapidly during early motor learning. In three experiments, healthy young participants (n = 92) repeatedly adapted to a 45° visuomotor rotation for a cycle of two to four reaches, followed by a cycle of two to four reaches with veridical feedback. Participants either used an aiming strategy that fully compensated for the rotation (experiment 1), or always aimed directly at the target, so that adaptation was implicit (experiment 2). We omitted visual feedback for the last reach of each cycle, after which participants localized their unseen hand. We observed an increase in the variability of angular localization errors when subjects used a strategy to counter the visuomotor rotation (experiment 1). This decrease in precision was less pronounced in the absence of reaiming (experiment 2), and when subjects knew that they would have to localize their hand on the upcoming trial, and could thus focus on hand position (experiment 3). We propose that strategic reaiming decreases the precision of perceived hand position, possibly due to attention to vision rather than proprioception. We discuss how these dynamics in precision during early motor learning could impact on motor control and shape the interplay between implicit and strategy-based motor adaptation.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Recent studies indicate that the precision with which people localize their hand limits implicit visuomotor learning. We found that localization precision is not static, but decreases early during learning. This decrease is pronounced when people apply a reaiming strategy to compensate for a visuomotor perturbation and is partly resistant to allocation of attention to the hand. We propose that these dynamics in position sense during learning may influence how implicit and strategy-based motor adaption interact.

The cerebellum acts as the analog to the medial temporal lobe for sensorimotor memory

The cerebellum is critical for sensorimotor learning. The specific contribution that it makes, however, remains unclear. Inspired by the classic finding that, for declarative memories, medial temporal lobe structures provide a gateway to the formation of long-term memory but are not required for short-term memory, we hypothesized that, for sensorimotor memories, the cerebellum may play an analogous role. Here we studied the sensorimotor learning of individuals with severe ataxia from cerebellar degeneration. We dissected the memories they formed during sensorimotor learning into a short-term temporally-volatile component, that decays rapidly with a time constant of just 15-20sec and thus cannot lead to long-term retention, and a longer-term temporally-persistent component that is stable for 60 sec or more and leads to long-term retention. Remarkably, we find that these individuals display dramatically reduced levels of temporally-persistent sensorimotor memory, despite spared and even elevated levels of temporally-volatile sensorimotor memory. In particular, we find both impairment that systematically increases with memory window duration over shorter memory windows (<12 sec) and near-complete impairment of memory maintenance over longer memory windows (>25 sec). This dissociation uncovers a new role for the cerebellum as a gateway for the formation of long-term but not short-term sensorimotor memories, mirroring the role of the medial temporal lobe for declarative memories. It thus reveals the existence of distinct neural substrates for short-term and long-term sensorimotor memory, and it explains both newly-identified trial-to-trial differences and long-standing study-to-study differences in the effects of cerebellar damage on sensorimotor learning ability.

Significance Statement

A key discovery about the neural underpinnings of memory, made more than half a century ago, is that long-term, but not short-term, memory formation depends on neural structures in the brain's medial temporal lobe (MTL). However, this dichotomy holds only for declarative memories - memories for explicit facts such as names and dates - as long-term procedural memories - memories for implicit knowledge such as sensorimotor skills - are largely unaffected even with substantial MTL damage. Here we demonstrate that the formation of long-term, but not short-term, sensorimotor memory depends on a neural structure known as the cerebellum, and we show that this finding explains the variability previously reported in the extent to which cerebellar damage affects sensorimotor learning.

Strategy-based motor learning decreases the post-movement β power

Motor learning depends on the joint contribution of several processes including cognitive strategies aiming at goal achievement and prediction error-driven implicit adaptation. Understanding this functional interplay and its clinical implications requires insight into the individual learning processes, including at a neural level. Here, we set out to examine the impact of learning a cognitive strategy, over and above implicit adaptation, on the oscillatory post-movement β rebound (PMBR), which typically decreases in power following (visuo)motor perturbations. Healthy participants performed reaching movements towards a target, with online visual feedback replacing the view of their moving hand. The feedback was sometimes rotated, either relative to their movements (visuomotor rotation) or invariant to their movements (and relative to the target; clamped feedback), always for two consecutive trials interspersed between non-rotated trials. In both conditions, the first trial with a rotation was unpredictable. On the second trial, the task was either to re-aim, and thereby compensate for the rotation experienced in the first trial (visuomotor rotation; Compensate condition), or to ignore the rotation and keep on aiming at the target (clamped feedback; Ignore condition). After-effects did not differ between conditions, indicating that the amount of implicit learning was similar, while large differences in movement direction in the second rotated trial between conditions indicated that participants successfully acquired re-aiming strategies. Importantly, PMBR power following the first rotated trial was modulated differently in the two conditions. Specifically, it decreased in both conditions, but this effect was larger when participants had to acquire a cognitive strategy and prepare to re-aim. Our results therefore suggest that the PMBR is modulated by cognitive demands of motor learning, possibly reflecting the evaluation of a behaviourally significant goal achievement error.

Contribution of implicit memory to adaptation of movement extent during reaching against unpredictable spring-like loads: insensitivity to intentional suppression of kinematic performance

We examined the extent to which intentionally underperforming a goal-directed reaching task impacts how memories of recent performance contribute to sensorimotor adaptation. Healthy human subjects performed computerized cognition testing and an assessment of sensorimotor adaptation, wherein they grasped the handle of a horizontal planar robot while making goal-directed out-and-back reaching movements. The robot exerted forces that resisted hand motion with a spring-like load that changed unpredictably between movements. The robotic test assessed how implicit and explicit memories of sensorimotor performance contribute to the compensation for the unpredictable changes in the hand-held load. After each movement, subjects were to recall and report how far the hand moved on the previous trial (peak extent of the out-and-back movement). Subjects performed the tests under two counter-balanced conditions: one where they performed with their best effort, and one where they intentionally sabotaged (i.e., suppressed) kinematic performance. Results from the computerized cognition tests confirmed that subjects understood and complied with task instructions. When suppressing performance during the robotic assessment, subjects demonstrated marked changes in reach precision, time to capture the target, and reaction time. We fit a set of limited memory models to the data to identify how subjects used implicit and explicit memories of recent performance to compensate for the changing loads. In both sessions, subjects used implicit, but not explicit, memories from the most recent trial to adapt reaches to unpredictable spring-like loads. Subjects did not "give up" on large errors, nor did they discount small errors deemed "good enough". Although subjects clearly suppressed kinematic performance (response timing, movement variability, and self-reporting of reach error), the relative contributions of sensorimotor memories to trial-by-trial variations in task performance did not differ significantly between the two testing conditions. We conclude that intentional performance suppression had minimal impact on how implicit sensorimotor memories contribute to adaptation of unpredictable mechanical loads applied to the hand.

Sensory prediction error drives subconscious motor learning outside of the laboratory

Sensorimotor adaptation is supported by at least two parallel learning systems: an intentionally controlled explicit strategy and an involuntary implicit learning system. Past work focused on constrained reaches or finger movements in laboratory environments has shown subconscious learning systems to be driven in part by sensory prediction error (SPE), i.e., the mismatch between the realized and expected outcome of an action. We designed a ball rolling task to explore whether SPEs can drive implicit motor adaptation during complex whole body movements that impart physical motion on external objects. After applying a visual shift, participants rapidly adapted their rolling angles to reduce the error between the ball and the target. We removed all visual feedback and told participants to aim their throw directly toward the primary target, revealing an unintentional 5.06° implicit adjustment to reach angles that decayed over time. To determine whether this implicit adaptation was driven by SPE, we gave participants a second aiming target that would "solve" the visual shift, as in the study by Mazzoni and Krakauer (Mazzoni P, Krakauer JW. J Neurosci 26: 3642-3645, 2006). Remarkably, after rapidly reducing ball-rolling error to zero (due to enhancements in strategic aiming), the additional aiming target caused rolling angles to deviate beyond the primary target by 3.15°. This involuntary overcompensation, which worsened task performance, is a hallmark of SPE-driven implicit learning. These results show that SPE-driven implicit processes, previously observed within simplified finger or planar reaching movements, actively contribute to motor adaptation in more complex naturalistic skill-based tasks.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Implicit and explicit learning systems have been detected using simple, constrained movements inside the laboratory. How these systems impact movements during complex whole body, skill-based tasks has not been established. Here, we demonstrate that sensory prediction errors significantly impact how a person updates their movements, replicating findings from the laboratory in an unconstrained ball-rolling task. This real-world validation is an important step toward explaining how subconscious learning helps humans execute common motor skills in dynamic environments.

Evidence of Implicit and Explicit Motor Learning during Gait Training with Distorted Rhythmic Auditory Cues

Gait training with rhythmic auditory cues contains motor learning mechanisms that are weighted more explicitly than implicitly. However, various clinical populations may benefit from a shift to gait training with greater implicit motor learning mechanisms. To investigate the ability to incorporate more implicit-weighted motor learning processes during rhythmic auditory cueing, we attempted to induce error-based recalibration using a subtly varying metronome cue for naïve unimpaired young adults. We assessed the extent of implicit and explicit retention after both an isochronous metronome and subtly varying metronome frequency during treadmill and overground walking. Despite 90% of participants remaining unaware of the changing metronome frequency, participants adjusted their cadence and step length to the subtly changing metronome, both on a treadmill and overground (p < 0.05). However, despite evidence of both implicit and explicit processes involved with each metronome (i.e., isochronous and varying), there were no between-condition differences in implicit or explicit retention for cadence, step length, or gait speed, and thus no increased implicit learning advantage with the addition of error-based recalibration for young, unimpaired adults.

Orientation control strategies and adaptation to a visuomotor perturbation in rotational hand movements

Computational approaches to biological motor control are used to discover the building blocks of human motor behaviour. Models explaining features of human hand movements have been studied thoroughly, yet only a few studies attempted to explain the control of the orientation of the hand; instead, they mainly focus on the control of hand translation, predominantly in a single plane. In this study, we present a new methodology to study the way humans control the orientation of their hands in three dimensions and demonstrate it in two sequential experiments. We developed a quaternion-based score that quantifies the geodicity of rotational hand movements and evaluated it experimentally. In the first experiment, participants performed a simple orientation-matching task with a robotic manipulator. We found that rotations are generally performed by following a geodesic in the quaternion hypersphere, which suggests that, similarly to translation, the orientation of the hand is centrally controlled, possibly by optimizing geometrical properties of the hand’s rotation. This result established a baseline for the study of human response to perturbed visual feedback of the orientation of the hand. In the second experiment, we developed a novel visuomotor rotation task in which the rotation is applied on the hand’s rotation, and studied the adaptation of participants to this rotation, and the transfer of the adaptation to a different initial orientation. We observed partial adaptation to the rotation. The patterns of the transfer of the adaptation to a different initial orientation were consistent with the representation of the orientation in extrinsic coordinates. The methodology that we developed allows for studying the control of a rigid body without reducing the dimensionality of the task. The results of the two experiments open questions for future studies regarding the mechanisms underlying the central control of hand orientation. These results can be of benefit for many applications that involve fine manipulation of rigid bodies, such as teleoperation and neurorehabilitation.

Individual sensorimotor adaptation characteristics are independent across orofacial speech movements and limb reaching movements

Sensorimotor adaptation is critical for human motor control but shows considerable interindividual variability. Efforts are underway to identify factors accounting for individual differences in specific adaptation tasks. However, a fundamental question has remained unaddressed: Is an individual's capability for adaptation effector system specific or does it reflect a generalized adaptation ability? We therefore tested the same participants in analogous adaptation paradigms focusing on distinct sensorimotor systems: speaking with perturbed auditory feedback and reaching with perturbed visual feedback. Each task was completed once with the perturbation introduced gradually (ramped up over 60 trials) and, on a different day, once with the perturbation introduced suddenly. Consistent with studies of each system separately, visuomotor reach adaptation was more complete than auditory-motor speech adaptation (80% vs. 29% of the perturbation). Adaptation was not significantly correlated between the speech and reach tasks. Moreover, considered within tasks, 1) adaptation extent was correlated between the gradual and sudden conditions for reaching but not for speaking, 2) adaptation extent was correlated with additional measures of performance (e.g., trial duration, within-trial corrections) only for reaching and not for speaking, and 3) fitting individual participant adaptation profiles with exponential rather than linear functions offered a larger benefit [lower root mean square error (RMSE)] for the reach task than for the speech task. Combined, results suggest that the ability for sensorimotor adaptation relies on neural plasticity mechanisms that are effector system specific rather than generalized. This finding has important implications for ongoing efforts seeking to identify cognitive, behavioral, and neurochemical predictors of individual sensorimotor adaptation.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study provides the first detailed demonstration that individual sensorimotor adaptation characteristics are independent across articulatory speech movements and limb reaching movements. Thus, individual sensorimotor learning abilities are effector system specific rather than generalized. Findings regarding one effector system do not necessarily apply to other systems, different underlying mechanisms may be involved, and implications for clinical rehabilitation or performance training also cannot be generalized.

Residual errors in visuomotor adaptation persist despite extended motor preparation periods

A consistent finding in sensorimotor adaptation is a persistent undershoot of full compensation, such that performance asymptotes with residual errors greater than seen at baseline. This behavior has been attributed to limiting factors within the implicit adaptation system, which reaches a suboptimal equilibrium between trial-by-trial learning and forgetting. However, recent research has suggested that allowing longer motor planning periods prior to movement eliminates these residual errors. The additional planning time allows required cognitive processes to be completed before movement onset, thus increasing accuracy. Here, we looked to extend these findings by investigating the relationship between increased motor preparation time and the size of imposed visuomotor rotation (30°, 45°, or 60°), with regard to the final asymptotic level of adaptation. We found that restricting preparation time to 0.35 s impaired adaptation for moderate and larger rotations, resulting in larger residual errors compared to groups with additional preparation time. However, we found that even extended preparation time failed to eliminate persistent errors, regardless of magnitude of cursor rotation. Thus, the asymptote of adaptation was significantly less than the degree of imposed rotation, for all experimental groups. In addition, there was a positive relationship between asymptotic error and implicit retention. These data suggest that a prolonged motor preparation period is insufficient to reliably achieve complete adaptation, and therefore, our results suggest that factors beyond that of planning time contribute to asymptotic adaptation levels.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Residual errors in sensorimotor adaptation are commonly attributed to an equilibrium between trial-by-trial learning and forgetting. Recent research suggested that allowing sufficient time for mental rotation eliminates these errors. In a number of experimental conditions, we show that although restricted motor preparation time does limit adaptation-consistent with mental rotation-extending preparation time fails to eliminate the residual errors in motor adaptation.

Mechanisms of Human Motor Learning Do Not Function Independently

Human motor learning is governed by a suite of interacting mechanisms each one of which modifies behavior in distinct ways and rely on different neural circuits. In recent years, much attention has been given to one type of motor learning, called motor adaptation. Here, the field has generally focused on the interactions of three mechanisms: sensory prediction error SPE-driven, explicit (strategy-based), and reinforcement learning. Studies of these mechanisms have largely treated them as modular, aiming to model how the outputs of each are combined in the production of overt behavior. However, when examined closely the results of some studies also suggest the existence of additional interactions between the sub-components of each learning mechanism. In this perspective, we propose that these sub-component interactions represent a critical means through which different motor learning mechanisms are combined to produce movement; understanding such interactions is critical to advancing our knowledge of how humans learn new behaviors. We review current literature studying interactions between SPE-driven, explicit, and reinforcement mechanisms of motor learning. We then present evidence of sub-component interactions between SPE-driven and reinforcement learning as well as between SPE-driven and explicit learning from studies of people with cerebellar degeneration. Finally, we discuss the implications of interactions between learning mechanism sub-components for future research in human motor learning.

Sensorimotor knowledge from task-irrelevant feedback contributes to motor learning

Exposure to task-irrelevant feedback leads to perceptual learning, but its effect on motor learning has been understudied. Here, we asked human participants to reach a visual target with a hand-controlled cursor while observing another cursor moving independently in a different direction. Although the task-irrelevant feedback did not change the main task's performance, it elicited robust savings in subsequent adaptation to classical visuomotor rotation perturbation. We demonstrated that the saving effect resulted from a faster formation of strategic learning through a series of experiments, not from gains in the implicit learning process. Furthermore, the saving effect was robust against drastic changes in stimulus features (i.e., rotation size or direction) or task types (i.e., for motor adaptation and skill learning). However, the effect was absent when the task-irrelevant feedback did not carry the visuomotor relationship embedded in visuomotor rotation. Thus, though previous research on perceptual learning has related task-irrelevant feedback to changes in early sensory processes, our findings support its role in acquiring abstract sensorimotor knowledge during motor learning. Motor learning studies have traditionally focused on task-relevant feedback, but our study extends the scope of feedback processes and sheds new light on the dichotomy of explicit and implicit learning in motor adaptation and motor structure learning.NEW & NOTEWORTHY When the motor system faces perturbations, such as fatigue or new environmental changes, it adapts to these changes by voluntarily selecting new action plans or implicitly fine-tuning the control. We show that the action selection part can be enhanced without practice or explicit instruction. We further demonstrate that this enhancement is probably linked to the acquisition of abstract knowledge about the to-be-adapted novel visual feedback. Our findings draw an interesting parallel between motor and perceptual learning by showing that top-down information affects both types of procedural learning.

Differential contributions of implicit and explicit learning mechanisms to various contextual cues in dual adaptation

The ability to switch between different visuomotor maps accurately and efficiently is an invaluable feature to a flexible and adaptive human motor system. This can be examined in dual adaptation paradigms where the motor system is challenged to perform under randomly switching, opposing perturbations. Typically, dual adaptation doesn’t proceed unless each mapping is trained in association with a predictive cue. To investigate this, we first explored whether dual adaptation occurs under a variety of contextual cues including active follow-through movements, passive follow-through movements, active lead-in movements, and static visual cues. In the second experiment, we provided one group with a compensatory strategy about the perturbations (30° CW and 30° CCW rotations) and their relationships to each context (static visual cues). We found that active, but not passive, movement cues elicited dual adaptation. Expectedly, we didn’t find evidence for dual adaptation using static visual cues, but those in the Instruction group compensated by implementing aiming strategies. Then, across all experimental conditions, we explored the extent by which dual learning is supported by both implicit and explicit mechanisms, regardless of whether they elicited dual adaptation across all the various cues. To this end, following perturbed training, participants from all experiments were asked to either use or ignore the strategy as they reached without visual feedback. This Process Dissociation Procedure teased apart the implicit and explicit contributions to dual adaptation. Critically, we didn’t find evidence for implicit learning for those given instructions, suggesting that when explicit aiming strategies are implemented in dual adaptation, implicit mechanisms are likely not involved. Thus, by implementing conscious strategies, dual adaptation can be easily facilitated even in cases where learning would not occur otherwise.

Speech auditory-motor adaptation to formant-shifted feedback lacks an explicit component: Reduced adaptation in adults who stutter reflects limitations in implicit sensorimotor learning

The neural mechanisms underlying stuttering remain poorly understood. A large body of work has focused on sensorimotor integration difficulties in individuals who stutter, including recently the capacity for sensorimotor learning. Typically, sensorimotor learning is assessed with adaptation paradigms in which one or more sensory feedback modalities are experimentally perturbed in real time. Our own previous work on speech with perturbed auditory feedback revealed substantial auditory-motor learning limitations in both children and adults who stutter (AWS). It remains unknown, however, which subprocesses of sensorimotor learning are impaired. Indeed, new insights from research on upper limb motor control indicate that sensorimotor learning involves at least two distinct components: (a) an explicit component that includes intentional strategy use and presumably is driven by target error and (b) an implicit component that updates an internal model without awareness of the learner and presumably is driven by sensory prediction error. Here, we attempted to dissociate these components for speech auditory-motor learning in AWS versus adults who do not stutter (AWNS). Our formant-shift auditory-motor adaptation results replicated previous findings that such sensorimotor learning is limited in AWS. Novel findings are that neither control nor stuttering participants reported any awareness of changing their productions in response to the auditory perturbation and that neither group showed systematic drift in auditory target judgments made throughout the adaptation task. These results indicate that speech auditory-motor adaptation to formant-shifted feedback relies exclusively on implicit learning processes. Thus, limited adaptation in AWS reflects poor implicit sensorimotor learning. Speech auditory-motor adaptation to formant-shifted feedback lacks an explicit component: Reduced adaptation in adults who stutter reflects limitations in implicit sensorimotor learning.

Assessing and defining explicit processes in visuomotor adaptation

The Process Dissociation Procedure (PDP) and Verbal Report Framework (VRF) reveal that both explicit (conscious) and implicit (unconscious) processes contribute to visuomotor adaptation. We looked to determine whether these two assessment methods establish similar processes underlying visuomotor adaptation by comparing the magnitude of explicit and implicit adaptation over time between the two assessments and to post-experiment assessments of awareness of the visuomotor distortion. Three groups of participants (PDP, VRF, VRF No-Cursor) completed three blocks of reach training in a virtual environment with a cursor rotated 40° clockwise relative to hand motion. Explicit and implicit adaptations were assessed immediately following each block, and again 5 min later. The VRF No-Cursor group completed the same assessment trials as the VRF group, but no visual feedback was presented during explicit and implicit assessment. Finally, participants completed a post-experiment questionnaire and a drawing task to assess their awareness of the visuomotor rotation and changes in reaches at the end of the experiment, respectively. We found that all groups adapted their reaches to the rotation. Averaged across participants, the magnitude and retention of explicit and implicit adaptations were similar between the PDP group and VRF group, with the VRF group demonstrating greater implicit adaptation than the VRF No-Cursor group. Furthermore, the magnitude of explicit adaptation established in the VRF group was not related to participant's post-experiment awareness of the visuomotor distortion nor how they had changed their reaches, as observed in the PDP group and VRF No-Cursor group. Together, these results indicate that, explicit adaptation established via typical VRF methods does not reflect one's awareness of the visuomotor distortion at the end of the experiment, and hence the established processes underlying visuomotor adaptation are dependent on method of assessment (i.e., PDP versus VRF).