Secondary adaptation of memory-guided saccades.
Adaptation of saccade gains in response to errors keeps vision and action co-registered in the absence of awareness or effort. Timing is key, as the visual error must be available shortly after the saccade is generated or adaptation does not occur. Here, we tested the hypothesis that when feedback is delayed, learning still occurs, but does so through small secondary corrective saccades. Using a memory-guided saccade task, we gave feedback about the accuracy of saccades that was falsely displaced by a consistent amount, but only after long delays. Despite the delayed feedback, over time subjects improved in accuracy toward the false feedback. They did so not by adjusting their primary saccades, but via directed corrective saccades made before feedback was given. We propose that saccade learning may be driven by different types of feedback teaching signals. One teaching signal relies upon a tight temporal relation with the saccade and contributes to obligatory learning independent of awareness. When this signal is ineffective due to delayed error feedback, a second compensatory teaching signal enables flexible adjustments to the spatial goal of saccades and helps maintain sensorimotor accuracy.
Srimal
Riju
R
Department of Psychology, New York University, 6 Washington Place, New York, NY 10003, USA.
Curtis
Clayton E
CE
D000222:Adaptation, Physiological / Q000502:physiology*; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D025461:Feedback, Physiological / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007858:Learning / Q000502:physiology; D008297:Male; D008568:Memory / Q000502:physiology*; D008960:Models, Psychological; D010775:Photic Stimulation / Q000379:methods; D011597:Psychomotor Performance / Q000502:physiology; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D012438:Saccades / Q000502:physiology*; D055815:Young Adult
Ann Neurol. 1995 May;37(5):557-67
7755349
J Neurosci. 2004 Jan 14;24(2):447-61
14724243
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1999 Dec;9(6):718-27
10607637
J Neurosci. 2006 Apr 5;26(14):3642-5
16597717
J Neurophysiol. 2008 Mar;99(3):1554-8
18234985
J Neurophysiol. 1999 Aug;82(2):1086-90
10444703
J Neurosci. 2003 Oct 8;23(27):9032-45
14534237
Exp Brain Res. 1993;92(3):528-41
8454016
Curr Opin Neurol. 2004 Feb;17(1):17-25
15090873
Exp Brain Res. 1994;100(2):293-306
7813666
J Neurosci. 2005 Oct 26;25(43):9919-31
16251440
Exp Brain Res. 2002 Jun;144(4):538-48
12037638
Prog Neurobiol. 2004 Jan;72(1):27-53
15019175
Curr Biol. 2000 Jul 13;10(14):R522-5
10898992
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2004 Dec;4(4):528-39
15849895
Neural Netw. 1998 Oct;11(7-8):1317-29
12662752
J Neurophysiol. 2007 Feb;97(2):1457-69
17135479
Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2002 Feb;13(1):41-52
11867249
Neural Comput. 2006 Apr;18(4):760-93
16494690
Vision Res. 2000;40(20):2779-96
10960651
J Physiol. 1969 Jun;202(2):437-70
5784296
Vision Res. 1995 Dec;35(23-24):3529-40
8560817
J Neurophysiol. 1999 May;81(5):2191-214
10322059
Neuroscience. 2006 Apr 28;139(1):173-80
16326021
Rev Oculomot Res. 1989;3:13-67
2486323
Brain. 1992 Oct;115 ( Pt 5):1359-86
1422793
Nature. 2000 May 4;405(6782):72-6
10811220
Trends Neurosci. 2003 Apr;26(4):222-7
12689774
J Neurophysiol. 1999 Apr;81(4):1827-38
10200217
Nature. 2000 Oct 12;407(6805):742-7
11048720