Dopaminergic manipulations affect the modulation and meta-modulation of movement speed: Evidence from two pharmacological interventions.

A body of research implicates dopamine in the average speed of simple movements. However, naturalistic movements span a range of different shaped trajectories and rarely proceed at a single constant speed. Instead, speed is reduced when drawing "corners" compared to "straights" (i.e., speed modulation), and the extent of this slowing down is dependent upon the global shape of the movement trajectory (i.e., speed meta-modulation) - for example whether the shape is an ellipse or a rounded square. At present, it is not known how (or whether) dopaminergic function controls continuous changes in speed during movement execution. The current paper reports effects on these kinematic features of movement following two forms of dopamine manipulation: Study One highlights movement differences in individuals with PD both ON and OFF their dopaminergic medication (N = 32); Study Two highlights movement differences in individuals from the general population on haloperidol (a dopamine receptor blocker, or "antagonist") and placebo (N = 43). Evidence is presented implicating dopamine in speed, speed modulation and speed meta-modulation, whereby low dopamine conditions are associated with reductions in these variables. These findings move beyond vigour models implicating dopamine in average movement speed, and towards a conceptualisation that involves the modulation of speed as a function of contextual information.

Short duration event related cerebellar TDCS enhances visuomotor adaptation.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS) is typically applied before or during a task, for periods ranging from 5 to 30 min. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesise that briefer stimulation epochs synchronous with individual task actions may be more effective. METHODS: In two separate experiments, we applied brief bursts of event-related anodal stimulation (erTDCS) to the cerebellum during a visuomotor adaptation task. RESULTS: The first study demonstrated that 1 s duration erTDCS time-locked to the participants' reaching actions enhanced adaptation significantly better than sham. A close replication in the second study demonstrated 0.5 s erTDCS synchronous with the reaching actions again resulted in better adaptation than standard TDCS, significantly better than sham. Stimulation either during the inter-trial intervals between movements or after movement, during assessment of visual feedback, had no significant effect. Because short duration stimulation with rapid onset and offset is more readily perceived by the participants, we additionally show that a non-electrical vibrotactile stimulation of the scalp, presented with the same timing as the erTDCS, had no significant effect. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that short duration, event related, anodal TDCS targeting the cerebellum enhances motor adaptation compared to the standard model. We discuss possible mechanisms of action and speculate on neural learning processes that may be involved.

Sensorimotor feedback loops are selectively sensitive to reward.

Although it is well established that motivational factors such as earning more money for performing well improve motor performance, how the motor system implements this improvement remains unclear. For instance, feedback-based control, which uses sensory feedback from the body to correct for errors in movement, improves with greater reward. But feedback control encompasses many feedback loops with diverse characteristics such as the brain regions involved and their response time. Which specific loops drive these performance improvements with reward is unknown, even though their diversity makes it unlikely that they are contributing uniformly. We systematically tested the effect of reward on the latency (how long for a corrective response to arise?) and gain (how large is the corrective response?) of seven distinct sensorimotor feedback loops in humans. Only the fastest feedback loops were insensitive to reward, and the earliest reward-driven changes were consistently an increase in feedback gains, not a reduction in latency. Rather, a reduction of response latencies only tended to occur in slower feedback loops. These observations were similar across sensory modalities (vision and proprioception). Our results may have implications regarding feedback control performance in athletic coaching. For instance, coaching methodologies that rely on reinforcement or 'reward shaping' may need to specifically target aspects of movement that rely on reward-sensitive feedback responses.

The dissociable effects of reward on sequential motor behavior.

Reward has consistently been shown to enhance motor behavior; however, its beneficial effects appear to be largely unspecific. For example, reward is associated with both rapid and training-dependent improvements in performance, with a mechanistic account of these effects currently lacking. Here we tested the hypothesis that these distinct reward-based improvements are driven by dissociable reward types: monetary incentive and performance feedback. Whereas performance feedback provides information on how well a motor task has been completed (knowledge of performance), monetary incentive increases the motivation to perform optimally without providing a performance-based learning signal. Experiment 1 showed that groups who received monetary incentive rapidly improved movement times (MTs), using a novel sequential reaching task. In contrast, only groups with correct performance-based feedback showed learning-related improvements. Importantly, pairing both maximized MT performance gains and accelerated movement fusion. Fusion describes an optimization process during which neighboring sequential movements blend together to form singular actions. Results from experiment 2 served as a replication and showed that fusion led to enhanced performance speed while also improving movement efficiency through increased smoothness. Finally, experiment 3 showed that these improvements in performance persist for 24 h even without reward availability. This highlights the dissociable impact of monetary incentive and performance feedback, with their combination maximizing performance gains and leading to stable improvements in the speed and efficiency of sequential actions.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Our work provides a mechanistic framework for how reward influences motor behavior. Specifically, we show that rapid improvements in speed and accuracy are driven by reward presented in the form of money, whereas knowledge of performance through performance feedback leads to training-based improvements. Importantly, combining both maximized performance gains and led to improvements in movement quality through fusion, which describes an optimization process during which sequential movements blend into a single action.

Reward-Based Improvements in Motor Control Are Driven by Multiple Error-Reducing Mechanisms.

Reward has a remarkable ability to invigorate motor behavior, enabling individuals to select and execute actions with greater precision and speed. However, if reward is to be exploited in applied settings, such as rehabilitation, a thorough understanding of its underlying mechanisms is required. In a series of experiments, we first demonstrate that reward simultaneously improves the selection and execution components of a reaching movement. Specifically, reward promoted the selection of the correct action in the presence of distractors, while also improving execution through increased speed and maintenance of accuracy. These results led to a shift in the speed-accuracy functions for both selection and execution. In addition, punishment had a similar impact on action selection and execution, although it enhanced execution performance across all trials within a block, that is, its impact was noncontingent to trial value. Although the reward-driven enhancement of movement execution has been proposed to occur through enhanced feedback control, an untested possibility is that it is also driven by increased arm stiffness, an energy-consuming process that enhances limb stability. Computational analysis revealed that reward led to both an increase in feedback correction in the middle of the movement and a reduction in motor noise near the target. In line with our hypothesis, we provide novel evidence that this noise reduction is driven by a reward-dependent increase in arm stiffness. Therefore, reward drives multiple error-reduction mechanisms which enable individuals to invigorate motor performance without compromising accuracy.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT While reward is well-known for enhancing motor performance, how the nervous system generates these improvements is unclear. Despite recent work indicating that reward leads to enhanced feedback control, an untested possibility is that it also increases arm stiffness. We demonstrate that reward simultaneously improves the selection and execution components of a reaching movement. Furthermore, we show that punishment has a similar positive impact on performance. Importantly, by combining computational and biomechanical approaches, we show that reward leads to both improved feedback correction and an increase in stiffness. Therefore, reward drives multiple error-reduction mechanisms which enable individuals to invigorate performance without compromising accuracy. This work suggests that stiffness control plays a vital, and underappreciated, role in the reward-based imporvemenets in motor control.

Reward-driven enhancements in motor control are robust to TMS manipulation.

A wealth of evidence describes the strong positive impact that reward has on motor control at the behavioural level. However, surprisingly little is known regarding the neural mechanisms which underpin these effects, beyond a reliance on the dopaminergic system. In recent work, we developed a task that enabled the dissociation of the selection and execution components of an upper limb reaching movement. Our results demonstrated that both selection and execution are concommitently enhanced by immediate reward availability. Here, we investigate what the neural underpinnings of each component may be. To this end, we aimed to alter the cortical excitability of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex and supplementary motor area using continuous theta-burst transcranial magnetic stimulation (cTBS) in a within-participant design (N = 23). Both cortical areas are involved in determining an individual's sensitivity to reward and physical effort, and we hypothesised that a change in excitability would result in the reward-driven effects on action selection and execution to be altered, respectively. To increase statistical power, participants were pre-selected based on their sensitivity to reward in the reaching task. While reward did lead to enhanced performance during the cTBS sessions and a control sham session, cTBS was ineffective in altering these effects. These results may provide evidence that other areas, such as the primary motor cortex or the premotor area, may drive the reward-based enhancements of motor performance.

Dopamine-Dependent Loss Aversion during Effort-Based Decision-Making.

From psychology to economics, there has been substantial interest in how costs (e.g., delay, risk) are represented asymmetrically during decision-making when attempting to gain reward or avoid punishment. For example, in decision-making under risk, individuals show a tendency to prefer to avoid punishment rather than to acquire the equivalent reward (loss aversion). Although the cost of physical effort has recently received significant attention, it remains unclear whether loss aversion exists during effort-based decision-making. On the one hand, loss aversion may be hardwired due to asymmetric evolutionary pressure on losses and gains and therefore exists across decision-making contexts. On the other hand, distinct brain regions are involved with different decision costs, making it questionable whether similar asymmetries exist. Here, we demonstrate that young healthy human participants (females, 16; males, 6) exhibit loss aversion during effort-based decision-making by exerting more physical effort to avoid punishment than to gain a same-size reward. Next, we show that medicated Parkinson's disease (PD) patients (females, 9; males, 9) show a reduction in loss aversion compared with age-matched control subjects (females, 11; males, 9). Behavioral and computational analysis revealed that people with PD exerted similar physical effort in return for a reward but were less willing to produce effort to avoid punishment. Therefore, loss aversion is present during effort-based decision-making and can be modulated by altered dopaminergic state. This finding could have important implications for our understanding of clinical disorders that show a reduced willingness to exert effort in the pursuit of reward.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Loss aversion-preferring to avoid punishment rather than to acquire equivalent reward-is an important concept in decision-making under risk. However, little is known about whether loss aversion also exists during decisions where the cost is physical effort. This is surprising given that motor cost shapes human behavior, and a reduced willingness to exert effort is a characteristic of many clinical disorders. Here, we show that healthy human individuals exert more effort to minimize punishment than to maximize reward (loss aversion). We also demonstrate that medicated Parkinson's disease patients exert similar effort to gain reward but less effort to avoid punishment when compared with healthy age-matched control subjects. This indicates that dopamine-dependent loss aversion is crucial for explaining effort-based decision-making.

Domain-Specific Working Memory, But Not Dopamine-Related Genetic Variability, Shapes Reward-Based Motor Learning.

The addition of rewarding feedback to motor learning tasks has been shown to increase the retention of learning, spurring interest in its possible utility for rehabilitation. However, motor tasks using rewarding feedback have repeatedly been shown to lead to great interindividual variability in performance. Understanding the causes of such variability is vital for maximizing the potential benefits of reward-based motor learning. Thus, using a large human cohort of both sexes (n = 241), we examined whether spatial (SWM), verbal, and mental rotation (RWM) working memory capacity and dopamine-related genetic profiles were associated with performance in two reward-based motor tasks. The first task assessed the participant's ability to follow a slowly shifting reward region based on hit/miss (binary) feedback. The second task investigated the participant's capacity to preserve performance with binary feedback after adapting to the rotation with full visual feedback. Our results demonstrate that higher SWM is associated with greater success and an enhanced capacity to reproduce a successful motor action, measured as change in reach angle following reward. In contrast, higher RWM was predictive of an increased propensity to express an explicit strategy when required to make large reach angle adjustments. Therefore, SWM and RWM were reliable, but dissociable, predictors of success during reward-based motor learning. Change in reach direction following failure was also a strong predictor of success rate, although we observed no consistent relationship with working memory. Surprisingly, no dopamine-related genotypes predicted performance. Therefore, working memory capacity plays a pivotal role in determining individual ability in reward-based motor learning.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Reward-based motor learning tasks have repeatedly been shown to lead to idiosyncratic behaviors that cause varying degrees of task success. Yet, the factors determining an individual's capacity to use reward-based feedback are unclear. Here, we assessed a wide range of possible candidate predictors, and demonstrate that domain-specific working memory plays an essential role in determining individual capacity to use reward-based feedback. Surprisingly, genetic variations in dopamine availability were not found to play a role. This is in stark contrast with seminal work in the reinforcement and decision-making literature, which show strong and replicated effects of the same dopaminergic genes in decision-making. Therefore, our results provide novel insights into reward-based motor learning, highlighting a key role for domain-specific working memory capacity.

Delineating cerebellar mechanisms in DYT11 myoclonus-dystonia.

BACKGROUND: Recent research has highlighted the role of the cerebellum in the pathophysiology of myoclonus-dystonia syndrome as a result of mutations in the ɛ-sarcoglycan gene (DYT11). Specifically, a cerebellar-dependent saccadic adaptation task is dramatically impaired in this patient group. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to investigate whether saccadic deficits coexist with impairments of limb adaptation to provide a potential mechanism linking cerebellar dysfunction to the movement disorder within symptomatic body regions. METHODS: Limb adaptation to visuomotor (visual feedback rotated by 30°) and forcefield (force applied by robot to deviate arm) perturbations were examined in 5 patients with DYT11 and 10 aged-matched controls. RESULTS: Patients with DYT11 successfully adapted to both types of perturbation. Modelled and averaged summary metrics that captured adaptation behaviors were equivalent to the control group across conditions. CONCLUSIONS: DYT11 is not characterized by a uniform deficit in adaptation. The previously observed large deficit in saccadic adaption is not reflected in an equivalent deficit in limb adaptation in symptomatic body regions. We suggest potential mechanisms at the root of this discordance and identify key research questions that need future study. © 2018 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Age-dependent Pavlovian biases influence motor decision-making.

Motor decision-making is an essential component of everyday life which requires weighing potential rewards and punishments against the probability of successfully executing an action. To achieve this, humans rely on two key mechanisms; a flexible, instrumental, value-dependent process and a hardwired, Pavlovian, value-independent process. In economic decision-making, age-related decline in risk taking is explained by reduced Pavlovian biases that promote action toward reward. Although healthy ageing has also been associated with decreased risk-taking in motor decision-making, it is currently unknown whether this is a result of changes in Pavlovian biases, instrumental processes or a combination of both. Using a newly established approach-avoidance computational model together with a novel app-based motor decision-making task, we measured sensitivity to reward and punishment when participants (n = 26,532) made a 'go/no-go' motor gamble based on their perceived ability to execute a complex action. We show that motor decision-making can be better explained by a model with both instrumental and Pavlovian parameters, and reveal age-related changes across punishment- and reward-based instrumental and Pavlovian processes. However, the most striking effect of ageing was a decrease in Pavlovian attraction towards rewards, which was associated with a reduction in optimality of choice behaviour. In a subset of participants who also played an independent economic decision-making task (n = 17,220), we found similar decision-making tendencies for motor and economic domains across a majority of age groups. Pavlovian biases, therefore, play an important role in not only explaining motor decision-making behaviour but also the changes which occur through normal ageing. This provides a deeper understanding of the mechanisms which shape motor decision-making across the lifespan.

Pharmacological Dopamine Manipulation Does Not Alter Reward-Based Improvements in Memory Retention during a Visuomotor Adaptation Task.

Motor adaptation tasks investigate our ability to adjust motor behaviors to an ever-changing and unpredictable world. Previous work has shown that punishment-based feedback delivered during a visuomotor adaptation task enhances error-reduction, whereas reward increases memory retention. While the neural underpinnings of the influence of punishment on the adaptation phase remain unclear, reward has been hypothesized to increase retention through dopaminergic mechanisms. We directly tested this hypothesis through pharmacological manipulation of the dopaminergic system. A total of 96 young healthy human participants were tested in a placebo-controlled double-blind between-subjects design in which they adapted to a 40° visuomotor rotation under reward or punishment conditions. We confirmed previous evidence that reward enhances retention, but the dopamine (DA) precursor levodopa (LD) or the DA antagonist haloperidol failed to influence performance. We reason that such a negative result could be due to experimental limitations or it may suggest that the effect of reward on motor memory retention is not driven by dopaminergic processes. This provides further insight regarding the role of motivational feedback in optimizing motor learning, and the basis for further decomposing the effect of reward on the subprocesses known to underlie motor adaptation paradigms.

The relationship between reinforcement and explicit control during visuomotor adaptation.

The motor system's ability to adapt to environmental changes is essential for maintaining accurate movements. Such adaptation recruits several distinct systems: cerebellar sensory-prediction error learning, success-based reinforcement, and explicit control. Although much work has focused on the relationship between cerebellar learning and explicit control, there is little research regarding how reinforcement and explicit control interact. To address this, participants first learnt a 20° visuomotor displacement. After reaching asymptotic performance, binary, hit-or-miss feedback (BF) was introduced either with or without visual feedback, the latter promoting reinforcement. Subsequently, retention was assessed using no-feedback trials, with half of the participants in each group being instructed to stop aiming off target. Although BF led to an increase in retention of the visuomotor displacement, instructing participants to stop re-aiming nullified this effect, suggesting explicit control is critical to BF-based reinforcement. In a second experiment, we prevented the expression or development of explicit control during BF performance, by either constraining participants to a short preparation time (expression) or by introducing the displacement gradually (development). Both manipulations strongly impaired BF performance, suggesting reinforcement requires both recruitment and expression of an explicit component. These results emphasise the pivotal role explicit control plays in reinforcement-based motor learning.

Contribution of explicit processes to reinforcement-based motor learning.

Despite increasing interest in the role of reward in motor learning, the underlying mechanisms remain ill defined. In particular, the contribution of explicit processes to reward-based motor learning is unclear. To address this, we examined subjects' ( n = 30) ability to learn to compensate for a gradually introduced 25° visuomotor rotation with only reward-based feedback (binary success/failure). Only two-thirds of subjects ( n = 20) were successful at the maximum angle. The remaining subjects initially followed the rotation but after a variable number of trials began to reach at an insufficiently large angle and subsequently returned to near-baseline performance ( n = 10). Furthermore, those who were successful accomplished this via a large explicit component, evidenced by a reduction in reach angle when they were asked to remove any strategy they employed. However, both groups displayed a small degree of remaining retention even after the removal of this explicit component. All subjects made greater and more variable changes in reach angle after incorrect (unrewarded) trials. However, subjects who failed to learn showed decreased sensitivity to errors, even in the initial period in which they followed the rotation, a pattern previously found in parkinsonian patients. In a second experiment, the addition of a secondary mental rotation task completely abolished learning ( n = 10), while a control group replicated the results of the first experiment ( n = 10). These results emphasize a pivotal role of explicit processes during reinforcement-based motor learning, and the susceptibility of this form of learning to disruption has important implications for its potential therapeutic benefits. NEW & NOTEWORTHY We demonstrate that learning a visuomotor rotation with only reward-based feedback is principally accomplished via the development of a large explicit component. Furthermore, this form of learning is susceptible to disruption with a secondary task. The results suggest that future experiments utilizing reward-based feedback should aim to dissect the roles of implicit and explicit reinforcement learning systems. Therapeutic motor learning approaches based on reward should be aware of the sensitivity to disruption.

Neural changes associated with cerebellar tDCS studied using MR spectroscopy.

Anodal cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is known to enhance motor learning, and therefore, has been suggested to hold promise as a therapeutic intervention. However, the neural mechanisms underpinning the effects of cerebellar tDCS are currently unknown. We investigated the neural changes associated with cerebellar tDCS using magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS). 34 healthy participants were divided into two groups which received either concurrent anodal or sham cerebellar tDCS during a visuomotor adaptation task. The anodal group underwent an additional session involving MRS in which the main inhibitory and excitatory neurotransmitters: GABA and glutamate (Glu) were measured pre-, during, and post anodal cerebellar tDCS, but without the behavioural task. We found no significant group-level changes in GABA or glutamate during- or post-tDCS compared to pre-tDCS levels, however, there was large degree of variability across participants. Although cerebellar tDCS did not affect visuomotor adaptation, surprisingly cerebellar tDCS increased motor memory retention with this being strongly correlated with a decrease in cerebellar glutamate levels during tDCS across participants. This work provides novel insights regarding the neural mechanisms which may underlie cerebellar tDCS, but also reveals limitations in the ability to produce robust effects across participants and between studies.

High motor variability in DYT1 dystonia is associated with impaired visuomotor adaptation.

For the healthy motor control system, an essential regulatory role is maintaining the equilibrium between keeping unwanted motor variability in check whilst allowing informative elements of motor variability. Kinematic studies in children with generalised dystonia (due to mixed aetiologies) show that movements are characterised by increased motor variability. In this study, the mechanisms by which high motor variability may influence movement generation in dystonia were investigated. Reaching movements in the symptomatic arm of 10 patients with DYT1 dystonia and 12 age-matched controls were captured using a robotic manipulandum and features of motor variability were extracted. Given that task-relevant variability and sensorimotor adaptation are related in health, markers of variability were then examined for any co-variance with performance indicators during an error-based learning visuomotor adaptation task. First, we confirmed that motor variability on a trial-by-trial basis was selectively increased in the homogenous and prototypical dystonic disorder DYT1 dystonia. Second, high baseline variability predicted poor performance in the subsequent visuomotor adaptation task offering insight into the rules which appear to govern dystonic motor control. The potential mechanisms behind increased motor variability and its corresponding implications for the rehabilitation of patients with DYT1 dystonia are highlighted.

Predicting explorative motor learning using decision-making and motor noise.

A fundamental problem faced by humans is learning to select motor actions based on noisy sensory information and incomplete knowledge of the world. Recently, a number of authors have asked whether this type of motor learning problem might be very similar to a range of higher-level decision-making problems. If so, participant behaviour on a high-level decision-making task could be predictive of their performance during a motor learning task. To investigate this question, we studied performance during an explorative motor learning task and a decision-making task which had a similar underlying structure with the exception that it was not subject to motor (execution) noise. We also collected an independent measurement of each participant's level of motor noise. Our analysis showed that explorative motor learning and decision-making could be modelled as the (approximately) optimal solution to a Partially Observable Markov Decision Process bounded by noisy neural information processing. The model was able to predict participant performance in motor learning by using parameters estimated from the decision-making task and the separate motor noise measurement. This suggests that explorative motor learning can be formalised as a sequential decision-making process that is adjusted for motor noise, and raises interesting questions regarding the neural origin of explorative motor learning.

Reward and punishment enhance motor adaptation in stroke.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The effects of motor learning, such as motor adaptation, in stroke rehabilitation are often transient, thus mandating approaches that enhance the amount of learning and retention. Previously, we showed in young individuals that reward and punishment feedback have dissociable effects on motor adaptation, with punishment improving adaptation and reward enhancing retention. If these findings were able to generalise to patients with stroke, they would provide a way to optimise motor learning in these patients. Therefore, we tested this in 45 patients with chronic stroke allocated in three groups. METHODS: Patients performed reaching movements with their paretic arm with a robotic manipulandum. After training (day 1), day 2 involved adaptation to a novel force field. During the adaptation phase, patients received performance-based feedback according to the group they were allocated: reward, punishment or no feedback (neutral). On day 3, patients readapted to the force field but all groups now received neutral feedback. RESULTS: All patients adapted, with reward and punishment groups displaying greater adaptation and readaptation than the neutral group, irrespective of demographic, cognitive or functional differences. Remarkably, the reward and punishment groups adapted to similar degree as healthy controls. Finally, the reward group showed greater retention. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides, for the first time, evidence that reward and punishment can enhance motor adaptation in patients with stroke. Further research on reinforcement-based motor learning regimes is warranted to translate these promising results into clinical practice and improve motor rehabilitation outcomes in patients with stroke.

No consistent effect of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation on visuomotor adaptation.

Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS) is known to enhance adaptation to a novel visual rotation (visuomotor adaptation), and it is suggested to hold promise as a therapeutic intervention. However, it is unknown whether this effect is robust across varying task parameters. This question is crucial if ctDCS is to be used clinically, because it must have a consistent and robust effect across a relatively wide range of behaviors. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of ctDCS on visuomotor adaptation across a wide range of task parameters that were systematically varied. Therefore, 192 young healthy individuals participated in 1 of 7 visuomotor adaptation experiments in either an anodal or sham ctDCS group. Each experiment examined whether ctDCS had a positive effect on adaptation when a unique feature of the task was altered: position of the monitor, offline tDCS, use of a tool, and perturbation schedule. Although we initially replicated the previously reported positive effect of ctDCS on visuomotor adaptation, this was not maintained during a second replication study or across a large range of varying task parameters. At the very least, this may call into question the validity of using ctDCS within a clinical context where a robust and consistent effect across behavior would be required.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS) is known to enhance motor adaptation and thus holds promise as a therapeutic intervention. However, understanding the reliability of ctDCS across varying task parameters is crucial. To examine this, we investigated whether ctDCS enhanced visuomotor adaptation across a range of varying task parameters. We found ctDCS to have no consistent effect on visuomotor adaptation, questioning the validity of using ctDCS within a clinical context.

Consensus Paper: Towards a Systems-Level View of Cerebellar Function: the Interplay Between Cerebellum, Basal Ganglia, and Cortex.

Despite increasing evidence suggesting the cerebellum works in concert with the cortex and basal ganglia, the nature of the reciprocal interactions between these three brain regions remains unclear. This consensus paper gathers diverse recent views on a variety of important roles played by the cerebellum within the cerebello-basal ganglia-thalamo-cortical system across a range of motor and cognitive functions. The paper includes theoretical and empirical contributions, which cover the following topics: recent evidence supporting the dynamical interplay between cerebellum, basal ganglia, and cortical areas in humans and other animals; theoretical neuroscience perspectives and empirical evidence on the reciprocal influences between cerebellum, basal ganglia, and cortex in learning and control processes; and data suggesting possible roles of the cerebellum in basal ganglia movement disorders. Although starting from different backgrounds and dealing with different topics, all the contributors agree that viewing the cerebellum, basal ganglia, and cortex as an integrated system enables us to understand the function of these areas in radically different ways. In addition, there is unanimous consensus between the authors that future experimental and computational work is needed to understand the function of cerebellar-basal ganglia circuitry in both motor and non-motor functions. The paper reports the most advanced perspectives on the role of the cerebellum within the cerebello-basal ganglia-thalamo-cortical system and illustrates other elements of consensus as well as disagreements and open questions in the field.

Individual differences in explicit and implicit visuomotor learning and working memory capacity.

The theoretical basis for the association between high working memory capacity (WMC) and enhanced visuomotor adaptation is unknown. Visuomotor adaptation involves interplay between explicit and implicit systems. We examined whether the positive association between adaptation and WMC is specific to the explicit component of adaptation. Experiment 1 replicated the positive correlation between WMC and adaptation, but revealed this was specific to the explicit component of adaptation, and apparently driven by a sub-group of participants who did not show any explicit adaptation in the correct direction. A negative correlation was observed between WMC and implicit learning. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that when the task restricted the development of an explicit strategy, high WMC was no longer associated with enhanced adaptation. This work reveals that the benefit of high WMC is specifically linked to an individual's capacity to use an explicit strategy. It also reveals an important contribution of individual differences in determining how adaptation is performed.