Modelling gait processes as a combination of sensory-motor and cognitive controls in an attempt to describe accidents on the level in occupational situations.

In occupational situations, accidents referred to as accidents on the level (AoLs) occur most of the time when locomotion control fails. This control is determined by the interactions between the operator and the environment, the task and the used tools. Hence, AoLs prevention requires developing ways to optimise these interactions. More fundamentally, AoLs prevention requires understanding locomotion control in situations where this control is at sake, that is in situations involving one or more AoLs factors. The purpose of this article is to propose a comprehensive model for the control of locomotion in occupational environments. This model featuring the operator, the task and the working space should be an appropriate tool to understand AoLs in the scope of their prevention. Firstly, we describe what occupational AoLs are. In a second part, we present a review of the theoretical and experimental knowledge related to the locomotion system through the various means developed by the Central Nervous System to cope with perturbations of the environment and/or particular constraints from the task. Finally, we propose a simplified systemic model presenting the various levels of control (sensory-motor to cognitive levels) describing locomotion in occupational situations, and we suggest experiments likely to produce the appropriate data to construct the final comprehensive model.

Influence of feedback modality on sensorimotor adaptation: contribution of visual, kinesthetic, and verbal cues.

In 4 studies, the authors tested the contributions of visual, kinesthetic, and verbal knowledge of results to the adaptive control of reaching movements toward visual targets. The same apparatus was used in all experiments, but the procedures differed in the sensory modality of the feedback that participants (N s = 5, 5, 6, and 6, respectively, in Experiments 1, 2, 3, and 4) received about their performances. Using biased visual, proprioceptive, or verbal feedback, the authors introduced a 5 degrees shift in the visuomanual relationship. Results showed no significant difference in the final amount of adaptation to the mismatch: On average, participants adapted to 79% of the perturbation. That finding is consistent with the view that adaptation is a multisensory, highly flexible process whose efficiency does not depend on the sensory channel conveying the error signal.

Evidence for distinct, differentially adaptable sensorimotor transformations for reaches to visual and proprioceptive targets.

Recent evidence suggests that planning a reaching movement entails similar stages and common networks irrespective of whether the target location is defined through visual or proprioceptive cues. Here we test whether the transformations that convert the sensory information regarding target location into the required motor output are common for both types of reaches. To do so, we adaptively modified these sensorimotor transformations through exposure to displacing prisms and hypothesized that if they are common to both types of reaches, the aftereffects observed for reaches to visual targets would generalize to reaches to a proprioceptive target. Subjects (n = 16) were divided into two groups that differed with respect to the sensory modality of the targets (visual or proprioceptive) used in the pre- and posttests. The adaptation phase was identical for both groups and consisted of movements toward visual targets while wearing 10.5 degrees horizontally displacing prisms. We observed large aftereffects consistent with the magnitude of the prism-induced shift when reaching toward visual targets in the posttest, but no significant aftereffects for movements toward the proprioceptive target. These results provide evidence that distinct, differentially adaptable sensorimotor transformations underlie the planning of reaches to visual and proprioceptive targets.

Adaptive control: a review of the ability to acquire and maintain high sensorimotor performance.

When the relationship which relates us to the environment through vision, often named visual mapping, is durably modified, our behaviour is altered at sensory, motor and cognitive levels. The brain has the ability through the so-called adaptive control to progressively decrease the motor errors despite visual image alteration. Adaptive control in both the visuo-manual and the vestibulo-ocular systems is reviewed. A parallel is tentatively made between adaptation to ordinary optical alterations (resulting from the use of refraction-corrective glasses) in the visual mapping of these two systems and the adaptation to more complex visuo-motor relationships experienced by people working in virtual environments.

Internally driven control of reaching movements: a study on a proprioceptively deafferented subject.

We investigated the possibility of controlling reaching movements on the sole basis of central mechanisms, i.e., without peripheral feedback on hand and target positions. A deafferented subject (GL) and control subjects reached with the unseen hand for a straight-ahead target that could be displaced laterally at movement onset. The shifted target was continuously or briefly lit, or not visible. In this latter condition, a beep from either side of subjects' head single-handedly signaled the change in the movement goal, so that movements could only be controlled through an internal representation of the memorised target position. Compared to controls, GL showed quantitatively similar corrections (77% of the target displacement, on an average) and similar reaction times to the target shift (mean = 516 ms), regardless of target visual information. These results highlight a remarkable capacity for controlling reaching movements on the sole basis of internally driven processes. On the other hand, trajectories in double-step trials differed drastically between GL and controls. Controls' trajectories were composed of two segments, the second of which brought the hand directly toward the displaced target. The patient produced three-segment, stair-like trajectories. The first and third segments were mainly in the sagittal plane and the second segment was a vector-image of the lateral target shift. A control experiment showed that GL's trajectories were not the result of a voluntary strategy used to adjust movement trajectory in the absence of peripheral information on hand position. We suggest that GL's trajectories reflect a deficit in interjoint coordination in the absence of proprioception.

On the nature of the vestibular control of arm-reaching movements during whole-body rotations.

Recent studies report efficient vestibular control of goal-directed arm movements during body motion. This contribution tested whether this control relies (a) on an updating process in which vestibular signals are used to update the perceived egocentric position of surrounding objects when body orientation changes, or (b) on a sensorimotor process, i.e. a transfer function between vestibular input and the arm motor output that preserves hand trajectory in space despite body rotation. Both processes were separately and specifically adapted. We then compared the respective influences of the adapted processes on the vestibular control of arm-reaching movements. The rationale was that if a given process underlies a given behavior, any adaptive modification of this process should give rise to observable modification of the behavior. The updating adaptation adapted the matching between vestibular input and perceived body displacement in the surrounding world. The sensorimotor adaptation adapted the matching between vestibular input and the arm motor output necessary to keep the hand fixed in space during body rotation. Only the sensorimotor adaptation significantly altered the vestibular control of arm-reaching movements. Our results therefore suggest that during passive self-motion, the vestibular control of arm-reaching movements essentially derives from a sensorimotor process by which arm motor output is modified on-line to preserve hand trajectory in space despite body displacement. In contrast, the updating process maintaining up-to-date the egocentric representation of visual space seems to contribute little to generating the required arm compensation during body rotations.

Head positioning control in a gravito-inertial field and in normal gravity.

The way in which the head is controlled in roll was investigated by dissociating the body axis and the gravito-inertial force orientation. Seated subjects (N = 8) were requested to align their head with their trunk, 30 degrees to the left, 30 degrees to the right or with the gravito-inertial vector, before, during (Per Rotation), after off-center rotation and on a tilted chair without rotation (Tilted). The gravito-inertial vector angle during rotation and the chair tilt angle were identical (17 degrees ). The subjects were either in total darkness or facing a visual frame that was fixed to the trunk. Both final error and within-subject variability of head positioning increased when the body axis and the gravito-inertial vector were dissociated (Per Rotation and Tilted). However, the behavior was different depending on whether the subjects were in the Tilted or Per Rotation conditions. The presentation of the visual frame reduced the within-subject variability and modified the perception of the gravito-inertial vector's orientation on the tilted chair. As head positioning with respect to the body and sensing of the gravito-inertial vector are modified when body axis and gravito-inertial vector orientation are dissociated, the observed decrease in performance while executing motor tasks in a gravito-inertial field may be at least in part attributed to the inaccurate sensing of head position.

Shifts in the retinal image of a visual scene during saccades contribute to the perception of reached gaze direction in humans.

We tested whether the perception of gaze direction is affected by the shifts in the retinal image of the visual scene during eye movements. To do so, we displaced the visual scene during saccadic eye movements and measured whether these unconsciously-detected shifts altered subjects' perception of the reached gaze direction. While facing a visual environment composed of light-emitting diodes, subjects first performed a rightward saccade of a great amplitude before producing a leftward saccade towards a target that appeared in the environment. During the primary saccade, the visual environment could be shifted by 4.5 degrees on either side. Subjects overestimated the target by 3.69 degrees and underestimated it by 2.45 degrees when the shift of the retinal image of the environment was greater and smaller than the extent of eye deviation, respectively. This suggests that the perception of gaze direction is largely based on the processing of retinal excitation both before and after the eye movements.

Online control of the direction of rapid reaching movements.

Online visual control of the direction of rapid reaching movements was assessed by evaluating how human subjects reacted to shifts in seen hand position near movement onsets. Participants ( N=10) produced saccadic eye and rapid arm movements (mean duration = 328 ms) towards a peripheral visual target in complete darkness. During the saccade, visual feedback of hand position could be shifted by 1, 2, 3 or 4 cm perpendicularly to the main movement direction. The resulting discrepancies between visual and proprioceptive information about hand position were never consciously perceived by the subjects. Following the shifts, hand trajectories deviated from those produced in a control condition (without shift) in order to bring seen hand position closer to the target. Globally, the deviations corresponded to 45% of the shifts, regardless of their magnitude or movement duration. This finding highlights not only the efficiency of visual feedback processing in online motor control but also underlines the significant contribution of limb proprioception.

Target and hand position information in the online control of goal-directed arm movements.

The present study compared the contribution of visual information of hand and target position to the online control of goal-directed arm movements. Their respective contributions were assessed by examining how human subjects reacted to a change of the position of either their seen hand or the visual target near the onset of the reaching movement. Subjects, seated head-fixed in a dark room, were instructed to look at and reach with a pointer towards visual targets located in the fronto-parallel plane at different distances to the right of the starting position. LEDs mounted on the tip of the pointer were used to provide true or erroneous visual feedback about hand position. In some trials, either the target or the pointer LED that signalled the actual hand position was shifted 4.5 cm to the left or to the right during the ocular saccade towards the target. Because of saccadic suppression, subjects did not perceive these displacements, which occurred near arm movement onset. The results showed that modifications of arm movement amplitude appeared, on average, 150 ms earlier and reached a greater extent (mean difference=2.7 cm) when there was a change of target position than when a change of the seen hand position occurred. These findings highlight the weight of target position information to the online control of arm movements. Visual information relative to hand position may be less contributive because proprioception also provides information about limb position.

[Targets of the memorized position and visual contexts]. / Pointage d'une position mémorisée et contexte visuel.

The goal of this study was to determine whether a sensorimotor or cognitive encoding is used to encode a target position and save it into iconic memory. The methodology consisted of disrupting a manual aiming movement to a memorized visual target by displacing the visual field containing the target. The nature of the encoding was inferred from the nature and the size of the errors relative to a control. The target was presented either centrally or in the right periphery. Participants moved their hand from the left to the right of fixation. Black and white vertical stripes covered the whole visual field. The visual field was either stationary throughout the trial or was displaced to the right or left at the extinction of the target or at the start of the hand movement. In the latter case, the displacement of the visual field obviously could only be taken into account by the participant during the gesture. In this condition, our hypothesis was that the aiming error would follow the direction of visual field displacement. Results showed three major effects: (1) Vision of the hand during the gesture improved the final accuracy; (2) visual field displacement produced an underestimation of the target distance only when the hand was not visible during the gesture and was always in the same direction displacement; and (3) the effect of the stationary structured visual field on aiming precision when the hand was not visible depended on the distance to the target. These results suggest that a stationary structured visual field is used to support the memory of the target position. The structured visual field is more critical when the hand is not visible and when the target appears in peripheral rather than central vision. This suggests that aiming depends on memory of the relative peripheral position of the target (allocentric reference). However, in the present task, cognitive encoding does not maintain the "position" of the target in memory without reference to the environment. The systematic effect of the visual field displacement on the manual aiming suggests that the role of environmental reference frames in memory for position is not well understood. Some studies, in particular those of Giesbrecht and Dixon (1999) and Glover and Dixon (2001), suggested differing roles of the environment in the retention of the target position and the control of aiming movements toward the target. The present observations contribute to understanding the mechanism involved in locating and grasping objects with the hand.

On-line versus off-line vestibular-evoked control of goal-directed arm movements.

The present study tested whether vestibular input can be processed on-line to control goal-directed arm movements towards memorized visual targets when the whole body is passively rotated during movement execution. Subjects succeeded in compensating for current body rotation by regulating ongoing arm movements. This performance was compared to the accuracy with which subjects reached for the target when the rotation occurred before the movement. Subjects were less accurate in updating the internal representation of visual space through vestibular signals than in monitoring on-line body orientation to control arm movement. These results demonstrate that vestibular signals contribute to motor control of voluntary arm movements and suggest that the processes underlying on-line regulation of goal-directed movements are different from those underlying navigation-like behaviors.

Visual signals contribute to the coding of gaze direction.

Accurate information about gaze direction is required to direct the hand towards visual objects in the environment. In the present experiments, we tested whether retinal inputs affect the accuracy with which healthy subjects indicate their gaze direction with the unseen index finger after voluntary saccadic eye movements. In experiment 1, subjects produced a series of back and forth saccades (about eight) of self-selected magnitudes before positioning the eyes in a self-chosen direction to the right. The saccades were produced while facing one of four possible visual scenes: (1) complete darkness, (2) a scene composed of a single light-emitting diode (LED) located at 18 degrees to the right, (3) a visually enriched scene made up of three LEDs located at 0 degrees, 18 degrees and 36 degrees to the right, or (4) a normally illuminated scene where the lights in the experimental room were turned on. Subjects were then asked to indicate their gaze direction with their unseen index finger. In the conditions where the visual scenes were composed of LEDs, subjects were instructed to foveate or not foveate one of the LEDs with their last saccade. It was therefore possible to compare subjects' accuracy when pointing in the direction of their gaze in conditions with and without foveal stimulation. The results showed that the accuracy of the pointing movements decreased when subjects produced their saccades in a dark environment or in the presence of a single LED compared to when the saccades were generated in richer visual environments. Visual stimulation of the fovea did not increase subjects' accuracy when pointing in the direction of their gaze compared to conditions where there was only stimulation of the peripheral retina. Experiment 2 tested how the retinal signals could contribute to the coding of eye position after saccadic eye movements. More specifically, we tested whether the shift in the retinal image of the environment during the saccades provided information about the reached position of the eyes. Subjects produced their series of saccades while facing a visual environment made up of three LEDs. In some trials, the whole visual scene was displaced either 4.5 degrees to the left or 3 degrees to the right during the primary saccade. These displacements created mismatches between the shift of the retinal image of the environment and the extent of gaze deviation. The displacements of the visual scene were not perceived by the subjects because they occurred near the peak velocity of the saccade (saccadic suppression phenomenon). Pointing accuracy was not affected by the unperceived shifts of the visual scene. The results of these experiments suggest that the arm motor system receives more precise information about gaze direction when there is retinal stimulation than when there is none. They also suggest that the most relevant factor in defining gaze direction is not the retinal locus of the visual stimulation (that is peripheral or foveal) but rather the amount of visual information. Finally, the results suggest an enhanced egocentric encoding of gaze direction by the retinal inputs and do not support a retinotopic model for encoding gaze direction.