Motor Variability Prior to Learning does not Facilitate the Ability to Adopt new Movement Solutions. (15th December 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ranganathan, Rajiv; Lin, Marco; Carey, Samuel; Lokesh, Rakshith; Lee, Mei-Hua; Krishnan, Chandramouli
• Is Part Of: Neuroscience. Volume 479(2021)
• Page Start: 157
• Page End: 168
• Publication Date: 2021-12-15
• Subjects: coordination -- synergy -- bimanual -- reorganization -- redundancy -- flexibility; Neurochemistry -- Periodicals; Neurophysiology -- Periodicals; Neurology -- Periodicals; Neurochimie -- Périodiques; Neurophysiologie -- Périodiques; Neurochemistry; Neurophysiology; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 612.8
• DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2021.10.021
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0306-4522

Abstract

Highlights: We examined how participants learn to use a new solution to perform a task. Participants learned a precision task which could be performed in multiple ways. Motor variability at baseline did not facilitate learning of new solution. Highlights the role of the task in determining the role of variability. Abstract: Many contexts in motor learning require a learner to change from an existing movement solution to a novel movement solution to perform the same task. Recent evidence has pointed to motor variability prior to learning as a potential marker for predicting individual differences in motor learning. However, it is not known if this variability is predictive of the ability to adopt a new movement solution for the same task. Here, we examined this question in the context of a redundant precision task requiring control of motor variability. Fifty young adults learned a precision task that involved throwing a virtual puck toward a target using both hands. Because the speed of the puck depended on the sum of speeds of both hands, this task could be achieved using multiple solutions. Participants initially performed a baseline task where there was no constraint on the movement solution, and then performed a novel task where they were constrained to adopt a specific movement solution requiring asymmetric left and right hand speeds. Results showed that participants were able to learn the new solution, and this change was associated with changes in both the amount and structure of variability. However, increased baseline motor variability did not facilitate initial or final task performance when using the new solution – in fact, greater variability was associated with higher errors. These results suggest that motor variability is not necessarily indicative of flexibility and highlight the role of the task context in determining the relation between motor variability and learning.