Investigating the Speed and Accuracy of Human Movement Corrections to Visual, Somatosensory, and Tactile Perturbations: Evidence for Distinct Sensorimotor Processes.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES eNeuro Pub Date : 2025-04-10 Print Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1523/ENEURO.0548-24.2025
Sadiya Abdulrabba, Jessica Facchini, Gerome Aleandro Manson
{"title":"Investigating the Speed and Accuracy of Human Movement Corrections to Visual, Somatosensory, and Tactile Perturbations: Evidence for Distinct Sensorimotor Processes.","authors":"Sadiya Abdulrabba, Jessica Facchini, Gerome Aleandro Manson","doi":"10.1523/ENEURO.0548-24.2025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Humans can adapt their movements in response to expected and unexpected perturbations. The speed and accuracy of these movement corrections may depend on the type of sensory information driving the perception of these perturbations. While previous research has indicated that corrections based on somatosensory information, comprised of proprioceptive and tactile inputs, are faster than corrections based on visual information, other studies have found comparable correction speeds in response to visual and tactile inputs. The purpose of this study was to systematically investigate the latencies (how fast) and magnitudes (how large) of movement corrections in response to perturbations of external visual targets, as well as somatosensory (proprioceptive and tactile) and tactile targets on the non-reaching limb. Participants performed reaching movements to a light-emitting diode (i.e., visual target), the felt position of a brush touching the index finger of the non-reaching hand (i.e., a tactile target), and the index finger of their non-reaching hand (somatosensory target). During some trials, the target was displaced 3 cm away or toward the participant either before or after the movement onset. Participants demonstrated faster and larger corrections to somatosensory target perturbations than to visual or tactile target perturbations. However, corrections to visual targets were more accurate than corrections to tactile targets. These findings support the hypothesis that distinct sensorimotor processes may underlie the adjustments made in response to somatosensory information versus those made in response to visual and tactile information.</p>","PeriodicalId":11617,"journal":{"name":"eNeuro","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11984754/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"eNeuro","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0548-24.2025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Humans can adapt their movements in response to expected and unexpected perturbations. The speed and accuracy of these movement corrections may depend on the type of sensory information driving the perception of these perturbations. While previous research has indicated that corrections based on somatosensory information, comprised of proprioceptive and tactile inputs, are faster than corrections based on visual information, other studies have found comparable correction speeds in response to visual and tactile inputs. The purpose of this study was to systematically investigate the latencies (how fast) and magnitudes (how large) of movement corrections in response to perturbations of external visual targets, as well as somatosensory (proprioceptive and tactile) and tactile targets on the non-reaching limb. Participants performed reaching movements to a light-emitting diode (i.e., visual target), the felt position of a brush touching the index finger of the non-reaching hand (i.e., a tactile target), and the index finger of their non-reaching hand (somatosensory target). During some trials, the target was displaced 3 cm away or toward the participant either before or after the movement onset. Participants demonstrated faster and larger corrections to somatosensory target perturbations than to visual or tactile target perturbations. However, corrections to visual targets were more accurate than corrections to tactile targets. These findings support the hypothesis that distinct sensorimotor processes may underlie the adjustments made in response to somatosensory information versus those made in response to visual and tactile information.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
研究人类运动对视觉、体感和触觉扰动修正的速度和准确性:不同感觉运动过程的证据。
人类可以调整自己的动作,以应对预期和意外的干扰。这些运动修正的速度和准确性可能取决于驱动这些扰动感知的感觉信息的类型。虽然先前的研究表明,基于本体感觉和触觉输入的体感信息的纠正比基于视觉信息的纠正要快,但其他研究发现,视觉和触觉输入的纠正速度相当。本研究的目的是系统地研究运动纠正的潜伏期(多快)和幅度(多大)响应外部视觉目标的扰动,以及体感(本体感觉和触觉)和触觉目标在非到达肢体上。参与者对发光二极管(即视觉目标)、触碰非触碰手的食指(即触觉目标)和非触碰手的食指(体感目标)进行触碰动作。在一些试验中,在运动开始之前或之后,目标被移动了3厘米或向参与者移动。与视觉或触觉目标扰动相比,参与者对躯体感觉目标扰动表现出更快、更大的修正。然而,对视觉目标的修正比对触觉目标的修正更准确。这些发现支持了一种假设,即不同的感觉运动过程可能是对体感信息作出反应的调整与对视觉和触觉信息作出反应的调整的基础。本研究的重点是系统地比较视觉、体感和触觉线索对校正反应的潜伏期和幅度。我们发现,虽然视觉校正比触觉校正更准确(减少端点误差)和精确(减少端点变异性),但对本体感觉信号(包括本体感觉和触觉信息)的校正比视觉和触觉信号的校正更快、更大。这些发现支持了一个假设,即不同的感觉运动过程是不同感觉模式运动纠正的基础,并强调了本体感觉反馈在促进快速在线调整中的关键作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
eNeuro
eNeuro Neuroscience-General Neuroscience
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
486
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: An open-access journal from the Society for Neuroscience, eNeuro publishes high-quality, broad-based, peer-reviewed research focused solely on the field of neuroscience. eNeuro embodies an emerging scientific vision that offers a new experience for authors and readers, all in support of the Society’s mission to advance understanding of the brain and nervous system.
期刊最新文献
Functional-Structural Coupling: Brain Reorganization in Presbycusis Is Related to Cognitive Impairment. Robust representation and nonlinear spectral integration of harmonic stacks in layer 4 of mouse primary auditory cortex. Building an Ecosystem of Seizure Localization Methods: Neural Fragility as the First Step. An Open-Source Restraint System for Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Awake Rats. What Is My Neuron Doing? Commentary on Huang et al. (2026).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1