Visuomotor adaptation needs a validation of prediction error by feedback error.

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

Generalization properties of a "saccadic-like" hand-reaching adaptation along a single degree of freedom.

Visuomotor-adaptation experiments devoted to the study of plasticity are also used to indirectly test hypotheses about how the brain encodes the spatio-temporal characteristics of arm movement directed at a visual target. A current major theory, the vectorial coding hypothesis, postulates that arm movements are processed differentially for direction and amplitude. This approach, at first developed in an extrinsic Cartesian frame of references, has been also adopted in an intrinsic joint space. In the present paper, we report an experiment that corroborates this last point of view. Subjects performed pointing movements in a one degree of freedom condition, while systematic self-attributed endpoint errors were introduced. Through an observation of motor behavior in a battery of pre- and post-tests, we suggested that adaptation consisted in an increase in the motor gain in the adapted direction, with a perfect transfer to all starting points in the experimental reaching space. We explained the results by the absence of intersensory conflict and of correlative sensory adaptive component. As this paradigm was adapted from the saccadic adaptation paradigm, we eventually compared the two paradigms and highlighted that both induced mostly motor effects.

Saccadic-like visuomotor adaptation involves little if any perceptual effects.

Studies on visuomotor adaptation provide crucial clues on the functional properties of the human motor system. The widely studied saccadic adaptation paradigm is a major example of such a fruitful field of investigation. Magescas and Prablanc (J Cogn Neurosci 18(1):75-83, 2006) proposed a transposition of this protocol to arm pointing behavior, by designing an experiment in which the informational context of the upper limb visuomotor system is comparable to that of the saccadic system. Subjects were given terminal only visual feedback in a hand pointing task, assumed to produce a purely terminal visual error signal. Importantly, this paradigm has been shown to induce no saccadic adaptation. Although the saccadic adaptation paradigm is known to induce a predominantly motor adaptation with minor sensory effects, the lack of sensory changes has not been tested in its transposition to pointing. The present study was a partial replication of Magescas and Prablanc's (J Cogn Neurosci 18(1):75-83, 2006) study with additional control tests. A first experiment searched for a possible change in the static visual-to-proprioceptive congruency. A second experiment, based on an anti-pointing task, aimed at separating the sensory and motor effects of the adaptation in a dynamic condition. Consistent with most results on saccadic adaptation, we found a predominant adaptation of the motor components, with little if any involvement of the sensory components. Results are interpreted by proposing a causal relationship between the type of error signal and its adaptive effects.