A comparison of sensorimotor adaptation in the visual and in the auditory modality

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer review

Authors

Research Organisations

View graph of relations

Details

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere107834
JournalPLOS ONE
Volume9
Issue number9
Publication statusPublished - 25 Sept 2014

Abstract

We compared sensorimotor adaptation in the visual and the auditory modality. Subjects pointed to visual targets while receiving direct spatial information about fingertip position in the visual modality, or they pointed to visual targets while receiving indirect information about fingertip position in the visual modality, or they pointed to auditory targets while receiving indirect information about fingertip position in the auditory modality. Feedback was laterally shifted to induce adaptation, and aftereffects were tested with both target modalities and both hands. We found that aftereffects of adaptation were smaller when tested with the non-adapted hand, i.e., intermanual transfer was incomplete. Furthermore, aftereffects were smaller when tested in the non-adapted target modality, i.e., intermodal transfer was incomplete. Aftereffects were smaller following adaptation with indirect rather than direct feedback, but they were not smaller following adaptation with auditory rather than visual targets. From this we conclude that the magnitude of adaptive recalibration rather depends on the method of feedback delivery (indirect versus direct) than on the modality of feedback (visual versus auditory).

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Cite this

A comparison of sensorimotor adaptation in the visual and in the auditory modality. / Schmitz, G.; Bock, O.
In: PLOS ONE, Vol. 9, No. 9, e107834, 25.09.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer review

Schmitz G, Bock O. A comparison of sensorimotor adaptation in the visual and in the auditory modality. PLOS ONE. 2014 Sept 25;9(9):e107834. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107834
Download
@article{7e59bb9a3ea24d1c8614728d31461ecb,
title = "A comparison of sensorimotor adaptation in the visual and in the auditory modality",
abstract = "We compared sensorimotor adaptation in the visual and the auditory modality. Subjects pointed to visual targets while receiving direct spatial information about fingertip position in the visual modality, or they pointed to visual targets while receiving indirect information about fingertip position in the visual modality, or they pointed to auditory targets while receiving indirect information about fingertip position in the auditory modality. Feedback was laterally shifted to induce adaptation, and aftereffects were tested with both target modalities and both hands. We found that aftereffects of adaptation were smaller when tested with the non-adapted hand, i.e., intermanual transfer was incomplete. Furthermore, aftereffects were smaller when tested in the non-adapted target modality, i.e., intermodal transfer was incomplete. Aftereffects were smaller following adaptation with indirect rather than direct feedback, but they were not smaller following adaptation with auditory rather than visual targets. From this we conclude that the magnitude of adaptive recalibration rather depends on the method of feedback delivery (indirect versus direct) than on the modality of feedback (visual versus auditory).",
author = "G. Schmitz and O. Bock",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2014 Schmitz, Bock. Copyright: Copyright 2014 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",
year = "2014",
month = sep,
day = "25",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0107834",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
journal = "PLOS ONE",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "9",

}

Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of sensorimotor adaptation in the visual and in the auditory modality

AU - Schmitz, G.

AU - Bock, O.

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2014 Schmitz, Bock. Copyright: Copyright 2014 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2014/9/25

Y1 - 2014/9/25

N2 - We compared sensorimotor adaptation in the visual and the auditory modality. Subjects pointed to visual targets while receiving direct spatial information about fingertip position in the visual modality, or they pointed to visual targets while receiving indirect information about fingertip position in the visual modality, or they pointed to auditory targets while receiving indirect information about fingertip position in the auditory modality. Feedback was laterally shifted to induce adaptation, and aftereffects were tested with both target modalities and both hands. We found that aftereffects of adaptation were smaller when tested with the non-adapted hand, i.e., intermanual transfer was incomplete. Furthermore, aftereffects were smaller when tested in the non-adapted target modality, i.e., intermodal transfer was incomplete. Aftereffects were smaller following adaptation with indirect rather than direct feedback, but they were not smaller following adaptation with auditory rather than visual targets. From this we conclude that the magnitude of adaptive recalibration rather depends on the method of feedback delivery (indirect versus direct) than on the modality of feedback (visual versus auditory).

AB - We compared sensorimotor adaptation in the visual and the auditory modality. Subjects pointed to visual targets while receiving direct spatial information about fingertip position in the visual modality, or they pointed to visual targets while receiving indirect information about fingertip position in the visual modality, or they pointed to auditory targets while receiving indirect information about fingertip position in the auditory modality. Feedback was laterally shifted to induce adaptation, and aftereffects were tested with both target modalities and both hands. We found that aftereffects of adaptation were smaller when tested with the non-adapted hand, i.e., intermanual transfer was incomplete. Furthermore, aftereffects were smaller when tested in the non-adapted target modality, i.e., intermodal transfer was incomplete. Aftereffects were smaller following adaptation with indirect rather than direct feedback, but they were not smaller following adaptation with auditory rather than visual targets. From this we conclude that the magnitude of adaptive recalibration rather depends on the method of feedback delivery (indirect versus direct) than on the modality of feedback (visual versus auditory).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84907588605&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0107834

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0107834

M3 - Article

VL - 9

JO - PLOS ONE

JF - PLOS ONE

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 9

M1 - e107834

ER -

By the same author(s)