JN AJP: Lung Cellular and Molecular Physiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (March 3, 2004). doi:10.1152/jn.00764.2003
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
92/1/416    most recent
00764.2003v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Van den Dobbelsteen, J. J.
Right arrow Articles by Smeets, J. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Van den Dobbelsteen, J. J.
Right arrow Articles by Smeets, J. B.
Submitted on August 7, 2003
Accepted on February 25, 2004

Body-centered visuomotor adaptation

John J. Van den Dobbelsteen1*, Eli Brenner1, and Jeroen B. Smeets1

1 Neuroscience, Erasmus MC Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: j.vandendobbelsteen{at}erasmusmc.nl.

Previous research has shown that humans generalise distortions of visuomotor feedback in terms of egocentric rotations. We examined whether these rotations are linked to the orientation of the eyes or of the shoulder of the arm that was used. Subjects moved a hand held cube between target locations in a sequence of adaptation and test phases. During adaptation phases, subjects received either veridical or distorted visual feedback about the location of the cube. The distortions were changes in azimuth, either relative to the eyes or relative to the shoulder. During test phases subjects received no visual feedback. Test phases were performed either with the arm that was exposed to the distorted feedback or with the unexposed arm. We compared test movement endpoints after distorted feedback with ones after veridical feedback. For the exposed arm, the spatial layout of the changes in endpoints clearly reflected the small differences between a rotation around the shoulder and around the eyes. For the unexposed arm, the changes in endpoints were smaller for both types of distortions, and were less consistent with the distortions. Thus although the adaptation closely matches the imposed distortion, it does not appear to be directly linked to the orientation of the eyes or of the exposed arm.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
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]


Home page
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
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]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2004 by the The American Physiological Society.