Science topic
Motor Learning - Science topic
Explore the latest questions and answers in Motor Learning, and find Motor Learning experts.
Questions related to Motor Learning
Please discuss this question with those with experience in both fields.
Artificial intelligence has been used in building educational units and in learning motor skills for sporting events
The polysynaptic connections between the neocortex and the cerebellum (as verified by fMRI resting-state functional connectivity) are such that the anterior lobe of the cerebellum mediates skeletomotor processing due to its connections with M1 and S1, that the mediolateral lobe mediates object processing due to its connections with the orbital and temporal cortices, and that the posterior lobe mediates spatial processing due to its connections with MT/MST (middle temporal and middle superior temporal cortices), the retrosplenial and parietal cortices, and the medial frontal lobes which house the ocular eye and head fields in primates (Chen and Tehovnik 2007; Tehovnik, Patel, Tolias et al. 2021). Van Overwalle et al. (2023) re-investigated the connections between the neocortex and the cerebellum as it pertains to human cognition using a database of 44,500 participants; it was hypothesized over two decades ago that the cerebellum is centrally involved in cognitive control (Schmahmann 1997). However, unlike the neocortical output which encodes information according to the senses, the cerebellar output operates according to a firing-rate code that is used in the contraction of muscles by circuits in the brain stem and spinal cord, converting all information entering the cerebellum into a muscle code (Herzfeld, Lisberger et al. 2023; Schiller and Tehovnik 2015; Tehovnik, Patel, Tolias et al. 2021). Furthermore, when the efference-copy signal is interrupted by electrical stimulation delivered either to the cerebellum or the saccade generator in the brain stem, primates never correct their memories following such interruption (Tehovnik, Patel, Tolias et al. 2021). A similar result occurs when the ocular proprioceptors are activated (Chen 2019; Roll and Roll 1987; Roll et al. 1991; Valey et al. 1994, 1995, 1997), which are known to send short-latency signals (within 4 ms) to the cerebellum for processing (Fuchs and Kornhuber 1969) which displaces the actual target location preventing a correction through vision: it takes over 30 ms for a visual signal to arrive at the cerebellum and brain stem (Miles and Lisberger 1981), thus being much too long to counter the effect of the proprioceptive perturbation. When perturbations occur by stimulation of the midbrain or neocortex the correct target location through memory is always acquired after the displacement; these regions are outside the efference-copy loop (Loyola et al. 2019; Shadmehr 2020; Tehovnik, Patel, Tolias et al. 2021).
Figure 1 summarizes the data of Van Overwalle et al. (2023, Fig. 4/King et al. 2019, re-analyzed) according to cognitive variables. Notice that in both anterior and posterior cerebellum there is a large representation from S1 and M1, which is consistent with the finding that 49% of the neocortex is dedicated to proprioception and movement (Sarubbo et al. 2020). Moreover, attentional processes have been attributed to the midline region of lobule V1 which contains neurons that respond during the execution of saccadic eye movements medially and head movements laterally (Fig. 8 of Tehovnik, Patel, Tolias et al. 2021). Much like the neocortex for which language/object encoding represents over 47% of the hemispheric real estate (Sarubbo et al. 2020), the cerebellar mediolateral lobe—which represents over half of the cerebellum—is also activated during language and object processing, even though a range of cognitive descriptors have been used to label the cerebellar functions such as ‘executive control’ and ‘mentalizing’ (i.e., watching movies), which in the neocortex includes the temporal and orbital cortices that store object information (Brecht and Freiwald 2012; Bruce et al. 1981; Schwarzlose et al. 2005; Schwiedrzik, Freiwald et al. 2015; Freiwald and Tsao 2010). The mentalizing/default label is known to include the cingulate cortex which is a fibre bundle linking various regions of the neocortex to the limbic system (Tehovnik, Hasanbegović, Chen 2024). It is noteworthy that the cerebellar real estate dedicated to limbic processes is minimal; the hippocampus (unlike the neocortex and cerebellum) is involved in transferring information rather than in the storage of information (Corkin 2002; Knecht 2004; Morrison and Hof 1997; Munoz-Lopez et al. 2010; Roux et al. 2021; Scoville and Milner 1957; Squire et al. 2001; Xu et al. 2016); it has been estimated that the storage capacity of the human cerebellum is 2.8 x 10^14 bits of information or 2^(2.8 x 10^14) possibilities, and the storage capacity of the human neocortex is 1.6 x 10^14 bits or 2^(1.6 x 10^14) possibilities (Huang 2008; Tang et al. 2001; Tehovnik, Hasanbegović, Chen 2024).
Figure 2 (modified from Fig. 4/King et al. 2019 of Van Overwalle et al. 2023) is used to simplify the representation for the cerebellum. As before, both the anterior and posterior lobes are dedicated to skeletomotor control with the posterior lobes also participating in spatial processing (a characteristic of MT/MST, the retrosplenial and parietal lobes, and medial frontal lobes). The oculomotor region is confined to lobule VI, and the mediolateral lobe subserves language and object processing. The cognitive labels used in the study of Van Overwalle et al. (2023) are indicated in parentheses.
Given that cognition depends on synaptic connectivity (‘for anesthesia [which disables the synapses] eliminates all sensation’, Hebb 1968) it is no surprise that this process has been ascribed to the cerebellum (Schmahmann 1997), which is polysynaptically connected to the neocortex with a comparable and proportionate representation of all neocortical functions (Buckner et al. 2011; King et al. 2019; Tehovnik, Patel, Tolias et al. 2021; Van Overwalle et al. 2023). The cerebellum, however, is not necessary for cognition even though severely damaged (or missing) it produces the retardation of one’s movements/ expressions (Yu et al. 2014). Cerebellar patients are still aware of the outside world since their vital senses are intact; yet they have great difficulty moving about. But if one cannot express their cognition/consciousness through dance, drawing, speaking, reading, and writing, for example, then the quality of life is severely compromised. The late Stephen Hawking, who suffered from ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis), is a case in point: toward the end of his life his movements were reduced to the transfer of 0.1 bits per second, which was based on the output of a cheek muscle and information of which was transferred to operate a communication device (Tehovnik, Patel, Tolias et al. 2021). Importantly, neocortical neurons consume 20 times more energy per neuron than do cerebellar neurons during immobility (Herculano-Houzel 2011). This has been attributed to the neocortex requiring high energy consumption to support cognition while immobile, i.e., while thinking, whereas the cerebellum is engaged when movements are being generated, which is always required to update an efference-copy code as it pertains to a behavior being updated (Tehovnik, Hasanbegović, Chen 2024). In closing, the functionality of the cerebellum and the neocortex can be described by Kahneman’s (2011) ‘thinking fast’ and ‘thinking slow’. ‘Thinking fast’ is dependent on rapid motor responses with little thinking, which has been associated with the cerebellum (Tehovnik, Hasanbegović, Chen 2024; Tehovnik, Patel, Tolias et al. 2021). ‘Thinking slow’ refers to the slow process of learning something new, which has been associated with the neocortex (Chen and Wise 1995ab; Hebb 1949, 1968; Kimura 1993; Ojemann 1991; Ito, Maldonado et al. 2022; Schwarzlose et al. 2005). But to be clear, both ‘thinking fast’ and ‘thinking slow’ require the cerebellum and the neocortex, but the difference is in the number of synapses recruited for information storage and behavioral execution: ‘thinking fast‘ necessitates fewer synapses than ‘thinking slow‘, since the latter is involved in the storage of new information through declarative and procedural learning, and in the creation of an efference-copy representation at the Purkinje neurons for the task being learned.
Hi,
I'm looking for an online course about motor learning or motor control. I could not find anything in the main MOOCs sites (Coursera, Udemy). Does anyone know such a course that I can audit?
Thanks
What would be considered as reaction time outliers in the Serial Reaction Time Task (SRTT)?
Some previous studies suggested RT below 300 ms and above 4000 ms should be excluded.
1) Is there a more flexible range for outliers specially for fast RTs? for example 200 ms or less?
2) is it possible to consider fast RTs (e.g., 300-150 ms) in the analysis? Because these fast RTs are indicative of learning and excluding them just affect the results.
Educational guidance on muscle torque and its use in motor learning. .The combination of biomechanics and motor learning in sport. (Book or article)
Many studies suggest that virtual reality rehabilitation can activate the cerebral cortex and improve the function of patients with neurological impairments. Also we hear hippo therapy has a positive effect on the physical function and psychological problems of children with Autism.
May hippo therapy and virtual reality together lead to overall improvements in the daily functioning and quality of life of these children?
Imagination is creativity in action. It can be using our brain and our senses to create an image within our mind. Imagination draws on our experiences and knowledge of the world around us and combines them with the complete unknown to make something new.
It allows us to explore beyond the constraints of our environment and our reality, into a world of dreams, where creativity and invention are at their strongest.
How does it work?
Is imagination unique to humans?
the very routine method of learning of an skill or subject is physical practicing. such as reading, driving or just talking. but can it maybe possible to learn skills with just imagining them and being focus on them? if it is possible, a new learning method can be learn with just mind!
Prior to the actual training of movement in rehabilitation with a medical device, it is often necessary to introduce the exercise and the way the device and/or the training software (program) works, and how the feedback and the movement are tied together. But how can you define the threshold for: the patient has understood the task and is now ready to proceed to the actual training (with less or no assistance). What are feasable markers or parameters (e.g., time to achieve a goal, number of successful repetitions, etc.)? And how can you best show and teach the exercise?
Is it possible to show the recovery of motor function of upper limbs or elbows of individuals with stroke by observing simple elbow flexion and changes in the EMG pattern of the extension muscles?
In addition to simply increasing the potential, please tell me the detail relationship between the phase pattern change of the flexor muscle and extensor muscle, the degree of synchronization with the joint motion or smoothness of the joint movement.
Are there papers showing evidence?
Hello all,
We know that action observation and motor imagery produce changes in the mu rhythm event-related desynchronization, make the mu rhythm more focal and producing a higher % decrease (see for example Naima Rüther et al 2014).
However, I am wondering if anybody is aware of studies that specifically addressed the changes in mu rhythm and its desynchronization, after a motor learning protocol with actual movements, and of various length?
Thank you!
FABIO
Hello,
I am designing a study on motor imagery modulation after an intervention. At the moment I have some issues with the inclusion criteria "motor imagery (MI) ablity". In order to reduce the variability of my data, I would like to include only the low-aptitude motor imagers, under the rationale that high-aptitude motor imagers may not improve significantly with the intervention, since their MI level is already higher that the low-aptitude counterpart.
I thought of asking the potential participant to complete the MIQ 3 (the latest version of the motor imagery questionnaire, Williams et al 2012). However I still need a threshold that would allow me to characterize the result as belonging to the low- or high-aptitude group.
Has such thing already been done? Any suggestion on how to exclude the highe-aptitude motor imagers?
Thank you very much!
It is clear that if we exercise something for example walking or shooting , our brain learn this function and we can do this better.
It is normal process of motor learning.
but the question is if we imagine these exersice in our mind without any physical activity, Can it have the same effect on our brain and our function?
Can we improve motor learning with just mental training?
For people with central nervous system disorders, how much joint assistance or individual's effort is required for joint movement to restore motor function or better motor learning? What factor that defines The optimum assistance for reorganization of CNS is? Please tell me the papers or information on these.
Im interested in how they are studying motor learning, and outcomes with implicit vs explicit learning styles
As we know, mirror neuron system (MNS) has important role on our observational motor learning, and suppression of alpha mu rhythm (8-12 Hz) on C3 and C4 sites is a sign of participation of MNS in action perception and imitation. Have you studied any research about effect of motor learning on changes of brain waves? Please share your knowledge with us ;)
Thanks
Saber
I'm interested in provision of skill acquisition/motor learning sessions for pre-school children as a means to encourage activity and improve sporting ability. Has anyone considered providing a structured program for pre-schoolers?
Performance coefficient (CP) is a unit of measurement to determine the performance of the volleyball skills.
However, PC had a problem, this unit of measurement does not determine the low performance, medium and high of the volleyball skills.
Which statistical model I can use to make this classification of the volleyball skills?
I am working on a family with autosomal recessive in which affected members have CP characters so how will i differentiate between whether it is Cerebral Palsy or Heredity Spastic Paraplegia?
This is for an undergraduate motor learning class that has been learning how stress affects motor performance.
I'm doing an experiment in which I would like to get information whether the person was about to click the pad or the finger was still. I'd like to know whether the inhibition was successful before any movement or after initial preparation for the movement. I'm going to use EMG recording for that. Can anyone recommend some papers that describe similar procedures or have experience with such setup? I'm especially interested in the right placement of electrodes. Thank you for any help.
Good to have an agreement on ubiquity of 1/f scaling, I also am of the opinion experimental control is essential (see Hasselman, 2013). I would add that direct confrontation of theoretical predictions is crucial as well:
"In order to advance scientific knowledge about scaling phenomena in living systems a program of strong inference that aims to produce closed theories of principles is needed. In order to reach this goal, empirical inquiries need to go beyond describing scaling phenomena in different populations in the context of impaired performance or pathology (e.g., Goldberger et al., 2002; Gilden and Hancock, 2007; West, 2010; Wijnants et al., 2012a). Several recent studies reveal scaling phenomena can be brought under experimental control, which is essential for a program of strong inference (e.g., Kello et al., 2007; Wijnants et al., 2009; Van Orden et al., 2010; Correll, 2011; Holden et al., 2011; Kuznetsov et al., 2011; Stephen et al., 2012). The diverging theoretical predictions examined in most studies reveal that the observed waveforms are more likely to originate from interaction-dominant complexity than from component-dominant mechanics (also see Turvey, 2007; Kello et al., 2010; Diniz et al., 2011)."
At least these articles revealing experimental control over scaling exponents should have been discussed:
- Wijnants et al., 2009 (Practice motor learning http://fredhasselman.com/main/wp-content/papercite-data/pdf/wijnants2009.pdf)
- Wijnants et al., 2012 (Speed-Accuracy TradeOff http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2012.00116 )
- Correll, 2008; 2011 (Correll, 2008 was replicated, manipulation failed, but all subjects showed 1/f noise)
- Kuznetsov et al., 2011; (instruction manipulation)
Then, there are many more studies that make risky predictions or directly confront two or more competing predictions (in fact, all predictions in 1/f studies are more risky than mainstream, because they concern interval predictions and not merely > 0). In any case, they do much more than 'just' show another case of 1/f noise in some population.
- Van Orden (2005) Tested presence of a low-frequency plateau predicted by AR models by recording a timeseries of several hours.
- Den Hartig et al. (Rowing proficiency https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274318392_Pink_Noise_in_Rowing_Ergometer_Performance_and_the_Role_of_Skill_Level )
- Wijnants et al. 2012 (correlations between scaling and reading in dyslexic readers, but not in average readers http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11881-012-0067-3 )
- Lowie et al. 2014 (multilingual speech production: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10407413.2014.929479 )
All the best,
Fred
I am specifically looking to see if the literature says they enhance the development of fine motor skills, specifically pincer grasp for writing or not. I am finding it hard to get anything from searches as I'm not sure what key terms to use.
I am looking for any experience or paper in which a coach/teacher designs affordances into learning programmes, especially in motor learning and acquisition of movement skills, in nonlinear pedagogy and constraints-led approach.
Perhaps the climbing fibre teaching signal varies in strength as proposed in my 1974 paper and recently demonstrated by Yang and Lisberger Nature 2014 510 529-32
I am looking into a 3D-experiment on spatial awareness. The software we want to use can either be projected using a 3D-TV (active shutter, at least 1920x1080, 65") or a 3D-projector (DLP link, refresh rate min 120z).
However, the question is, what is the better solution for high qualitative presentation of the stimuli. Does anyone have experience with the different setups? Are there any studies comparing both projection modes?
Thanks for the help
Nadja
For example, the golf swing training, it has very fast motion, so trainee cannot adjust his/her path even though he/she gets the real-time feedback.
Therefore, He/She performs different golf swing that has low velocity, then the trainee can modify his/her path easily by using the real-time feedback.
However, I wonder the motor learning of specific velocity of motion can be applied other velocity of that.
For example, how can we teach a person with right hemiplegia, 3 months post-stroke and having no to minimal voluntary control in upper limb and hand to eat independently using task oriented approach? What are all the factors that will influence your clinical decision making?
This is a very interesting debate. There is evidence supporting that an errorless training is more efficient for learning a new skill in people with cognitive/memory impairments. However, some authors suggest that a generalization to other motor skills and self-regulation of skills can only be obtained with an error-based training (see for example, Ownsworth et al., 2013). Does anyone having an opinion on this debate?
I'm a Motor Behavior's Ph.D. student. My interest is how performance in fundamental skills changes with age (children, adolescents and adults). l am having troubles finding articles in this area. I need some recommendations of authors or studies in this area.
Since there are a lot of references in this field, I'd like to find one or a few references that define 'coordination' once and for all (if possible).
Single phase - 240V
Three Phase - 415V
I mean, are there any mental characteristics that increase the efficiency of self-controlled feedback? In other words, which characteristics should the performer have to get more and more benefit from self-controlled feedback in motor learning?
We record the EMG signals of dart throwing. Now, we are going to calculate the relative timing of the throws. can I do this?
Why do some therapists ask patients for feedback in stretching and some just ' feel ' where the stretch is and do it. Will there be any long term neurological proprioceptive changes in engaging the cortex in the activity?
I am designing a sequential motor learning program for improving diabetes gait, but I don't know which parameter has priority over others to show trend of improvement in the process of gait training?