FINAL EXAM Flashcards
Explain 3 criticisms of motor programming theory and how GMP addresses them
- Storage- if we had motor programs for every movements we wouldn’t be able to store them all
*GMP- uses a set of general motor programs and adjust parameters (overall time and overall force, effector) - Novelty- how can we learn new skills if we have programs for every movement/how to create motor program
*GMP- learn new movements by adapting old GMPs - DoF- movements are complex, infinite ways to produce each movement
*GMP- compartmentalizes movements, organizes through invariant features (relative time and relative force, sequence of event) to be able to learn new movements more simply
Practicing when performance has plateaued, would cerebellar disorders show same results?
Performing at a plateau or ceiling still has benefits for learning through savings- the more you continue to practice, develop higher savings score or number of trials that the individual saves to return back to plateau in retention (can reach ceiling quicker)
With cerebellar disorders, you can also see benefits (had similar savings as healthy in research), which proves the disorder more effects motor control not learning *Topka et al, 1998
Why is variable practice better for learning than constant
Variable practice leads to more generalizability of motor programs, because it increases the number of inputs/sample of different movements, which strengthens the schema for strengthen relationships between movements
-in retention/transfer, now has stronger and more generalized recall schema
Why is random practice better than constant for learning
Random practice introduces contextual interference, which is beneficial for learning. 2 theories that support CI:
Elaborative Processing theory- with changing tasks, causes you to compare and contrast tasks more, which causes more processing, which leads to increased memory.
Forgetting and Reconstruction theory- when you change tasks you learn movement and store it in long term memory, and when you forget it and then tested in retention it causes you to pull it into working memory and reconstruct the motor program, improving learning
What is affected in microgravity (Saradjian 2013), (Bringoux 2020), (Lackner and Dizio, 1991)
Saradjian:
-Proprioception is less relied upon, better in normogravity but is not facilitated in microgravity
-Postural constraints absent in microgravity= no facilitation of somatosensory information found
*CNS can adjust weighting of sensory information to gravitational constraints
Bringoux:
-No difference in endpoint errors and kinematics
*change in kinetics
Lackner and Dizio:
-VOR decay increased in microgravity (increases reduction in eye-movement velocity)
With reference to BIG PICTURE model, explain how efference and feedforward control are used with sensory feedback for performance and learning of goal-directed actions?
Efference copy= copy of motor command, important for error estimation
Feedforward= movement planning before input to prepare body for action
-in the big picture model, the efference copy is compared to sensory feedback (actual outcome) to develop an error score, which helps develop a reference of correctness and guides inherent feedback
-actions are then refined to progress towards the goal
Describe recall and recognition schema, and explain how new movements are performed through Schmidt’s Schema Theory
Schemas store relationships between environmental inputs and outputs, and the theory relies on recall schemas and recognition schemas, and builds off Adam’s Closed Loop Theory of motor control.
Recall schemas= store movement parameter outcomes in long term memory from past movements and are important for movement production
Recognition schemas= evaluate sensory consequences after movement from recall schemas, contains relationship between initial conditions, environmental outcomes and sensory consequences
Learning:
To learn a new movement, recall schema would parameterize an existing motor program based on the best conditions to achieve the goal. The recognition schema then evaluates the sensory information feedback and detects error, and if movement is correct it strengthens the schema for the future (if not it will change parameters and adjust)
*criticisms: relies on KR and does not explain random practice benefits
*pro: variable practice strengthens schema
Adam’s Closed Loop Theory
KR is used to refine and improve motor learning through memory trace and perceptual trace.
Memory trace- initiates movement, is open loop component and functions like basic motor program
Perceptual trace- generated by memory trace, develops through practice and KR feedback and acts as reference of correctness (closed loop)
Learning:
2 stages of movement:
1. Verbal motor stage (novice, understanding movement, rely on feedback)
2. Motor stage (expert, movements automatic and rely less on feedback)
At the beginning (verbal-motor) perceptual trace weak, make lots of errors, feedback and repeated movement strengthens perceptual trace to begin to rely less on feedback and become more accurate, and later stage (motor) perceptual trace so strong that you are highly accurate and less KR required)
Memory trace-> movements-> perceptual trace-> feedback-> control center-> memory trace…
*criticisms: rely on KR, don’t see guidance effect, doesn’t explain variable practice
Why can clinical populations with sensory deficits perform worse in retention and transfer?
MS- and other disorders with sensory deficits- cannot sense the environment or therefore environmental feedback. This means recognition schema cannot evaluate feedback, to be able to refine movements and strengthen the schema, which facilitates learning
Measuring MS (measure of sensory processing, correlation, x and y axis)
Use EEG to measure evoked potential (attention to stimulus). An increased evoked potential means increased performance.
Positive correlation between somatosensory processing- evoked potential (x axis) and performance (y-axis)
Stroke experiment
-can either be ischemic or hemorrhagic, acute or chronic
-affect primary motor cortex, somatosensory cortex
-use pursuit rotor task to test tracking and learning
-change parameters of difficulty, retention period
-test learning in retention and transfer and compare to healthy control
-results expected from Vandermeran (acute) and Mooney (chronic) which both showed learning
-graph positive correlation with learning, just lower overall than healthy control
Response programming 3 complexities
- Accuracy/size of goal (fits law)
- Movement components (# of parts)
- Movement duration
