Motor Learning

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Motor Learning Learning Objectives . Upon completion of this lesson, you will be able to explain: . Human Movement System response to internal and external environmental stimuli. Muscle synergies/synergistic dominance . Kinesthesis . Proprioception . Sensorimotor integration . Feedback . Internal vs. External feedback Motor Behavior . Motor Behavior is the Human Movement System response to internal and external environmental stimuli. Motor Behavior Motor Control . Motor Control: How the central nervous system integrates internal and external sensory information with previous experiences to produce a motor response. Motor Control . Muscle Synergies: Groups of muscles that are recruited by the central nervous system to provide movement. Motor Control . Proprioception: The cumulative sensory input to the central nervous system form all mechanoreceptors that sense body position and limb movement. Muscle spindles . Golgi tendon organ . Joint receptors . Proprioception is altered after injury. Core and balance training enhances proprioceptive capabilities. Motor Learning . Motor Learning: Integration of motor control processes through practice and experience, leading to a relatively permanent change in the capacity to produce skilled movements. – How movements are learned and retained for future use. – Repeatedly practicing and providing feedback help in the development of permanent neural representations of motor patterns. – Example: riding a bike. Motor Learning Feedback: The use of sensory information and sensorimotor integration to help the HMS in motor learning. “Perfect practice makes perfect.” Motor Learning Internal feedback (a.k.a. sensory feedback): Sensory information is used by the body to reactively monitor movement and the environment. Application: Instruct clients to use good form when performing activities so that the sensory input is correct and the body will learn to react to it appropriately. Motor Learning . External feedback: Information provided by some external source, such as a health and fitness professional, videotape, mirror, or heart rate monitor, to supplement the internal environment. Motor Learning . Knowledge of Results: informs client about performance outcome. E.g. success of a lift. Knowledge of Performance: informs client about movement quality. E.g. specific feedback about body positions. Best at beginning of learning. Motor Development . Motor Development: The change in motor skill behavior over time throughout the lifespan. Summary . The Human Movement Systems must work together to produce movement (Motor Behavior). – Environmental and sensory information (proprioceptors) is gathered. – The brain interprets the information (sensory motor integration) – The motor response produces efficient movement (motor control) . Repeated practice, as well as internal and external feedback, allows for Motor Learning to occur. .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

A Revised Computational Neuroanatomy for Motor Control
This is the author’s final version; this article has been accepted for publication in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1 A Revised Computational Neuroanatomy for Motor Control 2 Shlomi Haar1, Opher Donchin2,3 3 1. Department of BioEngineering, Imperial College London, UK 4 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel 5 3. Zlotowski Center for Neuroscience, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel 6 7 Corresponding author: Shlomi Haar ([email protected]) 8 Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK 9 10 Acknowledgements: We would like to thank Ilan Dinstein, Liad Mudrik, Daniel Glaser, Alex Gail, and 11 Reza Shadmehr for helpful discussions about the manuscript. Shlomi Haar is supported by the Royal 12 Society – Kohn International Fellowship (NF170650). Work on this review was partially supported by 13 DFG grant TI-239/16-1. 14 15 Abstract 16 We discuss a new framework for understanding the structure of motor control. Our approach 17 integrates existing models of motor control with the reality of hierarchical cortical processing and the 18 parallel segregated loops that characterize cortical-subcortical connections. We also incorporate the recent 19 claim that cortex functions via predictive representation and optimal information utilization. Our 20 framework assumes each cortical area engaged in motor control generates a predictive model of a different 21 aspect of motor behavior. In maintaining these predictive models, each area interacts with a different part 22 of the cerebellum and basal ganglia. These subcortical areas are thus engaged in domain appropriate 23 system identification and optimization. This refocuses the question of division of function among different 24 cortical areas.
[Show full text]
Neuromodulators and Long-Term Synaptic Plasticity in Learning and Memory: a Steered-Glutamatergic Perspective
brain sciences Review Neuromodulators and Long-Term Synaptic Plasticity in Learning and Memory: A Steered-Glutamatergic Perspective Amjad H. Bazzari * and H. Rheinallt Parri School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham B4 7ET, UK; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +44-(0)1212044186 Received: 7 October 2019; Accepted: 29 October 2019; Published: 31 October 2019 Abstract: The molecular pathways underlying the induction and maintenance of long-term synaptic plasticity have been extensively investigated revealing various mechanisms by which neurons control their synaptic strength. The dynamic nature of neuronal connections combined with plasticity-mediated long-lasting structural and functional alterations provide valuable insights into neuronal encoding processes as molecular substrates of not only learning and memory but potentially other sensory, motor and behavioural functions that reflect previous experience. However, one key element receiving little attention in the study of synaptic plasticity is the role of neuromodulators, which are known to orchestrate neuronal activity on brain-wide, network and synaptic scales. We aim to review current evidence on the mechanisms by which certain modulators, namely dopamine, acetylcholine, noradrenaline and serotonin, control synaptic plasticity induction through corresponding metabotropic receptors in a pathway-specific manner. Lastly, we propose that neuromodulators control plasticity outcomes through steering glutamatergic transmission, thereby gating its induction and maintenance. Keywords: neuromodulators; synaptic plasticity; learning; memory; LTP; LTD; GPCR; astrocytes 1. Introduction A huge emphasis has been put into discovering the molecular pathways that govern synaptic plasticity induction since it was first discovered [1], which markedly improved our understanding of the functional aspects of plasticity while introducing a surprisingly tremendous complexity due to numerous mechanisms involved despite sharing common “glutamatergic” mediators [2].
[Show full text]
Motor Control: a Sense of Movement
RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS MOTOR CONTROL A sense of movement Neuroscience textbooks tell us that with a shorter latency after S1 stimu- whisker protraction, and that M1retract the motor cortex controls move- lation than after M1 stimulation. only induces whisker retraction ment. But now, Carl Petersen and Thus, S1 and M1 are both involved in indirectly, through S1 activation. colleagues show that sensory cortex whisker motor and sensory process- By mapping the neural pathways may have an equally important role ing. The M1 area that induced C2 involved in C2 whisker retraction in motor control. retraction was termed M1retract; a and protraction, the authors found The authors showed that a single, more medial M1 region that induced that M1C2 and S1C2 have reciprocal brief deflection of the C2 whisker C2 protraction under microstimula- connections and project to adjacent induced activity in the correspond- tion was termed M1protract. regions in subcortical areas. In the ing barrel column of the primary The authors next investigated the brain stem, this includes the reticular somatosensory cortex (S1), followed functional relevance of this finding. formation as a projection area of M1, by a response in a small area in the By attaching metal particles to the C2 and the spinal trigeminal nuclei as primary motor cortex (M1). Direct whisker and applying a pulsed mag- a projection area of S1. Both areas microstimulation or optogenetic netic field, the authors could evoke project to the facial nucleus, which stimulation of either area induced C2 whisker deflections. The whisker contains whisker motor neurons. a brief retraction of the C2 whisker, retracted in response to this stimulus, Indeed, direct electrical stimula- and this response was abolished when tion of the reticular formation and S1 was inactivated — but not spinal trigeminal nuclei induced when M1 was inactivated — with whisker protraction and retraction, tetrodoxin (TTX).
[Show full text]
Motor Control in the Brain
Motor Control in the Brain Travis DeWolf School of Computer Science University of Waterloo Waterloo, ON Canada December 19, 2008 Abstract There has been much progress in the development of a model of motor control in the brain in the last decade; from the improved method for mathematically extracting the predicted movement direction from a population of neurons to the application of optimal control theory to motor control models, much work has been done to further our understanding of this area. In this paper recent literature is reviewed and the direction of future research is examined. 1 Introduction In the last decade there has been a push from investigating the coordinate system used in the brain, which has been the focus of research since the 1970s, back toward using reductionist experiment techniques and developing more encompassing models of motor control in the brain[28]. Optimal control theory applied to motor control in the brain has also recently started being explored as a framework for models. This has lead to research into the underlying biology of the implementations of internal models of movement and reinforcement learning reward systems in the brain[32]. In addition to this, with the discovery of motor primitives[24], which are often referred to as the `building blocks of movement', many of the ideas about neural activity carried out in the motor cortex need be reworked. The analysis techniques employed by researchers have been improved and of course the computing power available has increased enormously, and these developments have in turn opened the door to the need for further mathematical technique developments for accurate movement analysis and prediction.
[Show full text]
Sensorimotor Skill Learning in Amnesia: Additional Evidence for the Neural Basis of Nondeclarative Memory Daniel Tranel, 1 Antonio R
Downloaded from learnmem.cshlp.org on September 24, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press RESEARCH Sensorimotor Skill Learning in Amnesia: Additional Evidence for the Neural Basis of Nondeclarative Memory Daniel Tranel, 1 Antonio R. Damasio, Hanna Damasio, and Joan P. Brandt Department of Neurology Division of Behavioral Neurologyand Cognitive Neur0science University of I0wa College of Medicine I0wa City, I0wa 52242 Abstract Introduction We investigated sensorimotor skill A number of investigations have established learning, a form of nondeclarative (implicit) that the learning of new skills can be preserved in memory, in 28 subjects with declarative patients who are unable to learn new words, faces, (explicit) memory defects caused by either and facts (e.g., Corkin 1965, 1968; MilDer 1972; mesial temporal (n = 15) or basal forebrain Cermak et al. 1973; Cohen and Squire 1980; Mar- (n=13) damage and in 66 normal control tone et al. 1984; Eslinger and Damasio 1986; Ga- subjects. All 28 amnesics had normal brieli et al. 1993; for reviews, see Baddeley 1982; learning of a rotor pursuit task. We also Hintzman 1990; Shimamura 1990; Cohen and studied in detail the sensorimotor skill Eichenbaum 1993). The concepts of "declarative" learning of patient Boswell. As a result of and "nondeclarative" memory have been used to bilateral damage to both mesial and lateral refer to the different types of information and task aspects of the temporal lobes and to the demands that are dissociated in such patients basal forebrain, Boswell has one of the most (Squire 1992). Declarative memory refers to rep- severe impairments ever reported for resentations of facts and events that can only be learning of all types of declarative brought to mind in image form.
[Show full text]
Sensory Change Following Motor Learning
A. M. Green, C. E. Chapman, J. F. Kalaska and F. Lepore (Eds.) Progress in Brain Research, Vol. 191 ISSN: 0079-6123 Copyright Ó 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. CHAPTER 2 Sensory change following motor learning { k { { Andrew A. G. Mattar , Sazzad M. Nasir , Mohammad Darainy , and { } David J. Ostry , ,* { Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada { Shahed University, Tehran, Iran } Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, Connecticut, USA k The Roxelyn and Richard Pepper Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA Abstract: Here we describe two studies linking perceptual change with motor learning. In the first, we document persistent changes in somatosensory perception that occur following force field learning. Subjects learned to control a robotic device that applied forces to the hand during arm movements. This led to a change in the sensed position of the limb that lasted at least 24 h. Control experiments revealed that the sensory change depended on motor learning. In the second study, we describe changes in the perception of speech sounds that occur following speech motor learning. Subjects adapted control of speech movements to compensate for loads applied to the jaw by a robot. Perception of speech sounds was measured before and after motor learning. Adapted subjects showed a consistent shift in perception. In contrast, no consistent shift was seen in control subjects and subjects that did not adapt to the load. These studies suggest that motor learning changes both sensory and motor function. Keywords: motor learning; sensory plasticity; arm movements; proprioception; speech motor control; auditory perception. Introduction the human motor system and, likewise, to skill acquisition in the adult nervous system.
[Show full text]
Motor Control Paper“ for Our Common Script - IPNFA - Nicola Fischer, Carsten Schaefer „Well-Fed-Version“
suggestion for a „Motor Control Paper“ for our common script - IPNFA - Nicola Fischer, Carsten Schaefer „well-fed-version“ _______________________________________ Motor Control _______________________________________ 1. Definition and Contributions of Motor Control 2. Postural control 3. Activities 1. Definitions and Contributions Ø Definition of Motor Control “Motor control is defined as the ability to regulate or direct the mechanisms essential to movement.” (Shumway-Cook & Woollacott 2011, p.4; Horak et al 1997) Relevant questions are: - “How does the central nervous system (CNS) organize the many individual muscles and joints into coordinated functional movements? (Bernstein 1967; Shumway-Cook & Woollacott 2011; Magill 2003; Schmidt & Lee 2011) - How is sensory information from the environment and the body used to select and control movement? - What is the best way to study movement, and how can movement problems be quantified in patients with motor control problems?” (Shumway-Cook & Woollacott 2011, p.4) “Movement emerges from interactions between the individual, the task and the environment.” (Shumway-Cook & Woollacott 2011, p.5) figure 1: adapted from Shumway-Cook (Shumway-Cook & Woollacott 2011) Ø Theories of Motor Control § Reflex Theory e.g. Sir. Ch. Sherrington (Sherrington 1947) § Hierarchical Theory e.g. Rudolf Magnus, Arnold Gesell § Motor Programming Theory e.g. Karl Lashley (Fitch & Martins 2014) Nicolai Bernstein … as a base for the Systems Theory (Bernstein 1967) § Systems Theory / Dynamic Action Theory / Dynamic Pattern Theory - self organizing systems e.g. J.A. Scott Kelso, Viktor Jirsa (Jirsa & Kelso 2004) § Ecological Theory e.g. James Gibson (Gibson 1983) Ø Sensory Contributions to Motor Control For the closed-loop control system, sensory (or afferent) information is necessary to regulate our suggestion for a „Motor Control Paper“ for our common script - IPNFA - Nicola Fischer, Carsten Schaefer „well-fed-version“ movements (Adams 1971; Schmidt & Lee 2011).
[Show full text]
The Relationship of Motor Skills Development to Verbal and Visual Short-Term Memory of Children Aged 9-10 Years
THE RELATIONSHIP OF MOTOR SKILLS DEVELOPMENT TO VERBAL AND VISUAL SHORT-TERM MEMORY OF CHILDREN AGED 9-10 YEARS By Fadya Mahrous Jerojeis A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Kinesiology-Doctor of Philosophy 2017 ABSTRACT THE RELATIONSHIP OF MOTOR SKILLS DEVELOPMENT TO VERBAL AND VISUAL SHORT-TERM MEMORY OF CHILDREN AGED 9-10 YEARS By Fadya Mahrous Jerojeis Introduction: the association between physical and cognitive development relies on the essential role that early motor development has in improving cognitive ability over time. This association highlights the need to explore the relationship between motor skills and cognitive functions (e.g., working memory capacity, attention, and inhibition) and whether the relation is specific to certain categories of motor and cognitive skills. Thus, the purpose of the current study is to examine the relationship among the level of fundamental motor skills (FMS) of both locomotor and object-control skills, verbal short-term memory (STM) and visuospatial short- term memory (STM), and gender. Information regarding ethnicity, BMI, and parents’ education level of the participants was collected for exploratory purposes. Method: A cross-sectional study was used to examine the relationship between FMS and verbal STM and visuospatial STM. Sixty-one children aged 9-10 years (boys: n = 28; 45.9% and girls: n = 33; 54.1%) were selected from five regions in Michigan. Two instruments were used to examine the relationship between FMS and verbal STM and visuospatial STM. The level of motor skills development determined by Test of Growth and Motor Development-2 (TGMD-2), and the level of verbal STM and visuospatial STM determined by Automated WM Assessment– Second Edition (AWMA).
[Show full text]
Final Program, the International Neuropsychological Society
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society (2009 ), 1 5, Su ppl. 2. C opy right © INS. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2009. doi: 10.1017/S135561770 9 9 9 1044 Final Program The International Neuropsychological Society, Finnish Neuropsychological Society, Joint Mid-Year Meeting July 29-August 1, 2009 Helsinki, Finland & Tallinn, Estonia WEDNESDAY, JULY 29, 2009 9:00 AM–12:00 PM Continuing Education Course 1: Cerebral Palsy And Traumatic Brain Injury: A Family-Based Approach To The Rehabilitation Of The Child Presenter: Lucia Braga Press Room 9:00 AM–12:00 PM Continuing Education Course 2: Clinical & Psychometric Strategies For Improving Accuracy For Identifying Cognitive Impairment Presenter: Grant Iverson Fennia II 1:00–4:00 PM Continuing Education Course 3: Neuropsychotherapy: Guidelines For A New Integrated Field Of Neuropsychological Treatment Presenter: Ritva Laaksonen Fennia I 1:00–4:00 PM Continuing Education Course 4: The Functional Neuroanatomy Of Semantic Memory Presenter: Alex Martin Fennia II 1:00–4:00 PM Continuing Education Course 5: Neurodevelopmental Consequences Of Very Low Birth Weight: Current Knowledge And Implications Presenter: H. Gerry Taylor Press Room 4:15–4:45 PM Opening Ceremony Europaea 4:45–5:30 PM Presidential Address: Time, Language, and the Human Brain INS President: Michael Corballis Europaea 1. CORBALLIS, M Time, Language, and the Human Brain. 6:00–7:30 PM Helsinki City Reception Helsinki City Hall Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.35.93, on 26 Sep 2021 at 02:03:36, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
[Show full text]
Attentional Focus, Motor Learning, and Expectancy Effect Wichanart Thengtrirat Bachelor of Arts (Psychology, Sport Studies) (Hons)
Attentional focus, motor learning, and expectancy effect Wichanart Thengtrirat Bachelor of Arts (Psychology, Sport Studies) (Hons) A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2014 School of Psychology 2 Abstract This dissertation examines the effect of attentional focus and expectancy on motor performance. The theoretical basis of attentional focus effects come from previous works of internal versus external type of focuses (Wulf, 2007), which states that external type of focus is superior for learning and performing motor skills. The theoretical mechanism of external versus internal focus is explained in relation to motor automaticity. Another series of research on the similar concept of attentional focus and motor performance utilised a distraction method (dual-task paradigm) to come to a similar conclusion (Beilock, 2011). Experts’ performance is not affected by distraction because their motor skills is automated and require low attentional capacity. The current research ran a series of studies to replicate and extend these previous findings and clarify some of the conflicting classification of different types of focuses. The purpose was to simplify some of the theoretical issues and enhance ecological validity for practitioners (e.g. coaches and athletes). However, current experiments did not find statistical significance of attentional focus effects on performance. Hence, the direction of the research turned to look at other variables potentially affecting performance. A key variable from the conducted experiments was identified as participants’ outcome expectancy. This expectancy effect was then manipulated in the research designs of two further studies which found significant effects. Participants performed accordingly to their outcome expectation regardless of the internal, external, or distraction methodology used.
[Show full text]
The Perception for Action Control Theory (PACT): a Perceptuo-Motor Theory of Speech Perception Jean-Luc Schwartz, Anahita Basirat, Lucie Ménard, Marc Sato
The Perception for Action Control Theory (PACT): a perceptuo-motor theory of speech perception Jean-Luc Schwartz, Anahita Basirat, Lucie Ménard, Marc Sato To cite this version: Jean-Luc Schwartz, Anahita Basirat, Lucie Ménard, Marc Sato. The Perception for Action Control Theory (PACT): a perceptuo-motor theory of speech perception. Journal of Neurolinguistics, Elsevier, 2012, 25 (5), pp.336-354. 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2009.12.004. hal-00442367 HAL Id: hal-00442367 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00442367 Submitted on 21 Dec 2009 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. The Perception for Action Control Theory (PACT): a perceptuo-motor theory of speech perception Jean-Luc Schwartz (1), Anahita Basirat (1), Lucie Ménard (2), Marc Sato (1) (1) GIPSA-Lab, Speech and Cognition Department (ICP), UMR 5216 CNRS – Grenoble University, France (2) Laboratoire de Phonétique, UQAM / CRLMB, Montreal, Canada Abstract It is an old-standing debate in the field of speech communication to determine whether speech perception involves auditory or multisensory representations and processing, independently on any procedural knowledge about the production of speech units or on the contrary if it is based on a recoding of the sensory input in terms of articulatory gestures, as posited in the Motor Theory of Speech Perception.
[Show full text]
Proprioception in Motor Learning: Lessons from a Deafferented Subject
Exp Brain Res DOI 10.1007/s00221-015-4315-8 RESEARCH ARTICLE Proprioception in motor learning: lessons from a deafferented subject N. Yousif1 · J. Cole2 · J. Rothwell3 · J. Diedrichsen4 Received: 11 July 2014 / Accepted: 7 May 2015 © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015 Abstract Proprioceptive information arises from a vari- movement in the perturbed direction. This suggests that ety of channels, including muscle, tendon, and skin affer- this form of learning may depend on static position sense at ents. It tells us where our static limbs are in space and the end of the movement. Our results indicate that dynamic how they are moving. It remains unclear however, how and static proprioception play dissociable roles in motor these proprioceptive modes contribute to motor learning. learning. Here, we studied a subject (IW) who has lost large myeli- nated fibres below the neck and found that he was strongly Keywords Proprioception · Motor control · impaired in sensing the static position of his upper limbs, Deafferentation · Force field learning when passively moved to an unseen location. When making reaching movements however, his ability to discriminate in which direction the trajectory had been diverted was unim- Introduction paired. This dissociation allowed us to test the involve- ment of static and dynamic proprioception in motor learn- Proprioception is a collective term that refers to non-visual ing. We found that IW showed a preserved ability to adapt input that tells us where our body is in space. Propriocep- to force fields when visual feedback was present. He was tion has an important function in normal motor control even sensitive to the exact form of the force perturbation, and motor learning.
[Show full text]