| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1 Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802; 2 Department of Kinesiology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
Submitted 7 January 2003; accepted in final form 26 July 2003
In the absence of visual feedback, subject reports of hand location tend to drift over time. Such drift has been attributed to a gradual reduction in the usefulness of proprioception to signal limb position. If this account is correct, drift should degrade the accuracy of movement distance and direction over a series of movements made without visual feedback. To test this hypothesis, we asked participants to perform six series of 75 repetitive movements from a visible start location to a visible target, in time with a regular, audible tone. Fingertip position feedback was given by a cursor during the first five trials in the series. Feedback was then removed, and participants were to continue on pace for the next 70 trials. Movements were made in two directions (30° and 120°) from each of three start locations (initial shoulder angles of 30°, 40°, 50°, and initial elbow angles of 90°). Over the 70 trials, the start location of each movement drifted, on average, 8 cm away from the initial start location. This drift varied systematically with movement direction, indicating that drift is related to movement production. However, despite these dramatic changes in hand position and joint configuration, movement distance and direction remained relatively constant. Inverse dynamics analysis revealed that movement preservation was accompanied by substantial modification of joint muscle torque. These results suggest that proprioception continues to be a reliable source of limb position information after prolonged time without vision, but that this information is used differently for maintaining limb position and for specifying movement trajectory.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  C. Ghez, R. Scheidt, and H. Heijink Different Learned Coordinate Frames for Planning Trajectories and Final Positions in Reaching J Neurophysiol, December 1, 2007; 98(6): 3614 - 3626. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Gritsenko, N. I. Krouchev, and J. F. Kalaska Afferent Input, Efference Copy, Signal Noise, and Biases in Perception of Joint Angle During Active Versus Passive Elbow Movements J Neurophysiol, September 1, 2007; 98(3): 1140 - 1154. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. B. J. Smeets, J. J. van den Dobbelsteen, D. D. J. de Grave, R. J. van Beers, and E. Brenner Sensory integration does not lead to sensory calibration PNAS, December 5, 2006; 103(49): 18781 - 18786. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. M. Beurze, S. Van Pelt, and W. P. Medendorp Behavioral Reference Frames for Planning Human Reaching Movements J Neurophysiol, July 1, 2006; 96(1): 352 - 362. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. A. Scheidt, M. A. Conditt, E. L. Secco, and F. A. Mussa-Ivaldi Interaction of Visual and Proprioceptive Feedback During Adaptation of Human Reaching Movements J Neurophysiol, June 1, 2005; 93(6): 3200 - 3213. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. D. Walsh, C. W. Hesse, D. L. Morgan, and U. Proske Human forearm position sense after fatigue of elbow flexor muscles J. Physiol., July 15, 2004; 558(2): 705 - 715. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Visit Other APS Journals Online |
