Spatial Coincidence of Intentional Actions Modulates an Implicit Visuomotor Control
Spatial Coincidence of Intentional Actions Modulates an Implicit Visuomotor Control
复制标题
DOI：
10.1152/jn.91133.2008
复制
发表时间：
2010-05-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Gomi, Hiroaki
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Abekawa, Naotoshi;Gomi, Hiroaki
Abekawa N，Gomi H。有意行为的空间重合调节隐式视觉运动控制。 J Neurophysiol 103: 2717-2727, 2010。首次发表于 2010 年 3 月 17 日； doi：10.1152/jn.91133.2008。我们研究了一种有助于达到矫正的视觉运动机制：手动跟随反应（MFR），这是对背景视觉运动的快速反应，通常在身体移动时作为重新传入而发生。尽管 MFR 的一些视觉特异性已被阐明，但其运动协调的功能和计算机制仍不清楚，主要是因为它涉及凝视、到达目标和视觉刺激之间的复杂关系。为了直接探索这些因素在 MFR 中如何相互作用，我们评估了注视、手臂伸展和视觉运动之间的空间重合对 MFR 的影响。当注视位置偏离到达目标且视网膜上保持相同的视觉运动时，随着位移的增加，MFR 的幅度显着下降。对凝视、到达目标和视觉运动位置的阶乘操作表明，响应降低是由于凝视和到达目标之间的空间分离造成的，而不是由于视觉运动和到达目标之间的空间分离造成的。此外，消除中央凹周围的视觉运动也会减弱 MFR。这些空间重合对 MFR 的影响与它们对视觉运动引起的目标感知错误定位的影响完全不同。此外，我们发现 MFR 的调制灵敏度与对注视和到达位置之间的空间不匹配的眼睛跟随反应之间存在明显差异。这些结果表明，在我们的实验中观察到的 MFR 调节并不是由于目标和视觉运动之间的视觉相互作用的变化或早期视觉处理中运动敏感性的调节而引起的。相反，MFR 的运动指令似乎是由凝视和伸手之间的空间关系调节的。
Abekawa N, Gomi H. Spatial coincidence of intentional actions modulates an implicit visuomotor control. J Neurophysiol 103: 2717-2727, 2010. First published March 17, 2010; doi: 10.1152/jn.91133.2008. We investigated a visuomotor mechanism contributing to reach correction: the manual following response (MFR), which is a quick response to background visual motion that frequently occurs as a reafference when the body moves. Although several visual specificities of the MFR have been elucidated, the functional and computational mechanisms of its motor coordination remain unclear mainly because it involves complex relationships among gaze, reaching target, and visual stimuli. To directly explore how these factors interact in the MFR, we assessed the impact of spatial coincidences among gaze, arm reaching, and visual motion on the MFR. When gaze location was displaced from the reaching target with an identical visual motion kept on the retina, the amplitude of the MFR significantly decreased as displacement increased. A factorial manipulation of gaze, reaching-target, and visual motion locations showed that the response decrease is due to the spatial separation between gaze and reaching target but is not due to the spatial separation between visual motion and reaching target. Additionally, elimination of visual motion around the fovea attenuated the MFR. The effects of these spatial coincidences on the MFR are completely different from their effects on the perceptual mislocalization of targets caused by visual motion. Furthermore, we found clear differences between the modulation sensitivities of the MFR and the ocular following response to spatial mismatch between gaze and reaching locations. These results suggest that the MFR modulation observed in our experiment is not due to changes in visual interaction between target and visual motion or to modulation of motion sensitivity in early visual processing. Instead the motor command of the MFR appears to be modulated by the spatial relationship between gaze and reaching.