RESUMEN
The accurate estimation of limb state is necessary for movement planning and execution. While state estimation requires both feedforward and feedback information, we focus here on the latter. Prior literature has shown that integrating visual and proprioceptive feedback improves estimates of static limb position. However, differences in visual and proprioceptive feedback delays suggest that multisensory integration could be disadvantageous when the limb is moving. We formalized this hypothesis by modeling feedback-based state estimation using the longstanding maximum likelihood estimation model of multisensory integration, which we updated to account for sensory delays. Our model predicted that the benefit of multisensory integration was largely lost when the limb was passively moving. We tested this hypothesis in a series of experiments in human subjects that compared the degree of interference created by discrepant visual or proprioceptive feedback when estimating limb position either statically at the end of the movement or dynamically at movement midpoint. In the static case, we observed significant interference: discrepant feedback in one modality systematically biased sensory estimates based on the other modality. However, no interference was seen in the dynamic case: participants could ignore sensory feedback from one modality and accurately reproduce the motion indicated by the other modality. Together, these findings suggest that the sensory feedback used to compute a state estimate differs depending on whether the limb is stationary or moving. While the former may tend toward multimodal integration, the latter is more likely to be based on feedback from a single sensory modality.Significance statement The estimation of limb state involves feedforward and feedback information. While estimation based on feedback has been well studied when the limb is stationary, it is unknown if similar sensory processing supports limb position estimates when moving. Using a computational model and behavioral experiments, we show that feedback-based state estimation may involve multisensory integration in the static case, but it is likely based on a single modality when the limb is moving. We suggest that this difference may stem from visual and proprioceptive feedback delays.
RESUMEN
Individuals who have experienced a left hemisphere cerebrovascular accident (LCVA) have been shown to make errors in naturalistic action tasks designed to assess the ability to perform everyday activities such as preparing a cup of coffee. Naturalistic action errors in this population are often attributed to limb apraxia, a common deficit in the representation and performance of object-related actions. However, naturalistic action impairments are also observed in right hemisphere stroke and traumatic brain injury, populations infrequently associated with apraxia, and errors across all these populations are influenced by overall severity. Based on these and other data, an alternative (though not mutually exclusive) account is that naturalistic action errors in LCVA are also a consequence of deficits in general attentional resource availability or allocation. In this study, we conducted a retrospective analysis of data from a large group of 51 individuals with LCVA who had completed a test of naturalistic action, along with a battery of tests assessing praxis, attention allocation and control, reasoning, and language abilities to determine which of these capacities contribute uniquely to naturalistic action impairments. Using a regularized regression method, we found that naturalistic action impairments are predicted by both praxis deficits (hand posture sequencing and gesture recognition), as well as attention allocation and control deficits (orienting and dividing attention), along with language comprehension ability and age. Using support vector regression-lesion symptom mapping (SVR-LSM), we also demonstrated that naturalistic action impairments are associated with lesions to posterior middle temporal gyrus and anterior inferior parietal lobule - regions known to be implicated in praxis; as well the middle frontal gyrus that has been implicated in both praxis and attention allocation and control. Taken together, these findings support the hypothesis that naturalistic action impairments in LCVA are a consequence of apraxia as well as deficits in attention allocation and control.