Punishment Leads to Greater Sensorimotor Learning But Less Movement Variability Compared to Reward.

When a musician practices a new song, hitting a correct note sounds pleasant while striking an incorrect note sounds unpleasant. Such reward and punishment feedback has been shown to differentially influence the ability to learn a new motor skill. Recent work has suggested that punishment leads to greater movement variability, which causes greater exploration and faster learning. To further test this idea, we collected 102 participants over two experiments. Unlike previous work, in Experiment 1 we found that punishment did not lead to faster learning compared to reward (n = 68), but did lead to a greater extent of learning. Surprisingly, we also found evidence to suggest that punishment led to less movement variability, which was related to the extent of learning. We then designed a second experiment that did not involve adaptation, allowing us to further isolate the influence of punishment feedback on movement variability. In Experiment 2, we again found that punishment led to significantly less movement variability compared to reward (n = 34). Collectively our results suggest that punishment feedback leads to less movement variability. Future work should investigate whether punishment feedback leads to a greater knowledge of movement variability and or increases the sensitivity of updating motor actions.

Reinforcement-based processes actively regulate motor exploration along redundant solution manifolds.

From a baby's babbling to a songbird practising a new tune, exploration is critical to motor learning. A hallmark of exploration is the emergence of random walk behaviour along solution manifolds, where successive motor actions are not independent but rather become serially dependent. Such exploratory random walk behaviour is ubiquitous across species' neural firing, gait patterns and reaching behaviour. The past work has suggested that exploratory random walk behaviour arises from an accumulation of movement variability and a lack of error-based corrections. Here, we test a fundamentally different idea-that reinforcement-based processes regulate random walk behaviour to promote continual motor exploration to maximize success. Across three human reaching experiments, we manipulated the size of both the visually displayed target and an unseen reward zone, as well as the probability of reinforcement feedback. Our empirical and modelling results parsimoniously support the notion that exploratory random walk behaviour emerges by utilizing knowledge of movement variability to update intended reach aim towards recently reinforced motor actions. This mechanism leads to active and continuous exploration of the solution manifold, currently thought by prominent theories to arise passively. The ability to continually explore muscle, joint and task redundant solution manifolds is beneficial while acting in uncertain environments, during motor development or when recovering from a neurological disorder to discover and learn new motor actions.

Visual accuracy dominates over haptic speed for state estimation of a partner during collaborative sensorimotor interactions.

We routinely have physical interactions with others, whether it be handing someone a glass of water or jointly moving a heavy object together. These sensorimotor interactions between humans typically rely on visual feedback and haptic feedback. Recent single-participant studies have highlighted that the unique noise and time delays of each sense must be considered to estimate the state, such as the position and velocity, of one's own movement. However, we know little about how visual feedback and haptic feedback are used to estimate the state of another person. Here, we tested how humans utilize visual feedback and haptic feedback to estimate the state of their partner during a collaborative sensorimotor task. Across two experiments, we show that visual feedback dominated haptic feedback during collaboration. Specifically, we found that visual feedback led to comparatively lower task-relevant movement variability, smoother collaborative movements, and faster trial completion times. We also developed an optimal feedback controller that considered the noise and time delays of both visual feedback and haptic feedback to estimate the state of a partner. This model was able to capture both lower task-relevant movement variability and smoother collaborative movements. Taken together, our empirical and modeling results support the idea that visual accuracy is more important than haptic speed to perform state estimation of a partner during collaboration.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Physical collaboration between two or more individuals involves both visual and haptic feedback. Here, we investigated how visual and haptic feedback is used to estimate the movements of a partner during a collaboration task. Our experimental and computational modeling results parsimoniously support the notion that greater visual accuracy is more important than faster yet noisier haptic feedback when estimating the state of a partner.

The sensorimotor system modulates muscular co-contraction relative to visuomotor feedback responses to regulate movement variability.

The naturally occurring variability in our movements often poses a significant challenge when attempting to produce precise and accurate actions, which is readily evident when playing a game of darts. Two differing, yet potentially complementary, control strategies that the sensorimotor system may use to regulate movement variability are impedance control and feedback control. Greater muscular co-contraction leads to greater impedance that acts to stabilize the hand, while visuomotor feedback responses can be used to rapidly correct for unexpected deviations when reaching toward a target. Here, we examined the independent roles and potential interplay of impedance control and visuomotor feedback control when regulating movement variability. Participants were instructed to perform a precise reaching task by moving a cursor through a narrow visual channel. We manipulated cursor feedback by visually amplifying movement variability and/or delaying the visual feedback of the cursor. We found that participants decreased movement variability by increasing muscular co-contraction, aligned with an impedance control strategy. Participants displayed visuomotor feedback responses during the task but, unexpectedly, there was no modulation between conditions. However, we did find a relationship between muscular co-contraction and visuomotor feedback responses, suggesting that participants modulated impedance control relative to feedback control. Taken together, our results highlight that the sensorimotor system modulates muscular co-contraction, relative to visuomotor feedback responses, to regulate movement variability and produce accurate actions.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The sensorimotor system has the constant challenge of dealing with the naturally occurring variability in our movements. Here, we investigated the potential roles of muscular co-contraction and visuomotor feedback responses to regulate movement variability. When we visually amplified movements, we found that the sensorimotor system primarily uses muscular co-contraction to regulate movement variability. Interestingly, we found that muscular co-contraction was modulated relative to inherent visuomotor feedback responses, suggesting an interplay between impedance and feedback control.