|
|
Liebermann, D. G., & Hoffman, J. R. (2005). Timing of preparatory landing responses as a function of availability of optic flow information. J Electromyogr Kinesiol, 15(1), 120–130.
Abstract: This study investigated temporal patterns of EMG activity during self-initiated falls with different optic flow information ('gaze directions'). Onsets of EMG during the flight phase were monitored from five experienced volunteers that completed 72 landings in three gaze directions (downward, mid-range and horizontal) and six heights of fall (10-130 cm). EMG recordings were obtained from the right gastrocnemius, tibialis anterior, biceps femoris and rectus femoris muscles, and used to determine the latency of onset (L(o)) and the perceived time to contact (T(c)). Impacts at touchdown were also monitored using as estimates the major peak of the vertical ground reaction forces (F(max)) normalized to body mass, time to peak (T(max)), peak impulse (I(norm)) normalized to momentum, and rate of change of force (dF(max)/dt). Results showed that L(o) was longer as heights of fall increased, but remained within a narrow time-window at >50 cm landings. No significant differences in L(o) were observed when gaze direction was changed. The relationship between T(c) and flight time followed a linear trend regardless of gaze direction. Gaze direction did not significantly affect the landing impacts. In conclusion, availability of optic flow during landing does not play a major role in triggering the preparatory muscle actions in self-initiated falls. Once a structured landing plan has been acquired, the relevant muscles respond relative to the start of the fall.
|
|
|
|
Friedman, J., Amiaz, A., & Korman, M. (2022). The online and offline effects of changing movement timing variability during training on a finger-opposition task. Sci Rep, 12(1), 13319.
Abstract: In motor learning tasks, there is mixed evidence for whether increased task-relevant variability in early learning stages leads to improved outcomes. One problem is that there may be a connection between skill level and motor variability, such that participants who initially have more variability may also perform worse on the task, so will have more room to improve. To avoid this confound, we experimentally manipulated the amount of movement timing variability (MTV) during training to test whether it improves performance. Based on previous studies showing that most of the improvement in finger-opposition tasks comes from optimizing the relative onset time of the finger movements, we used auditory cues (beeps) to guide the onset times of sequential movements during a training session, and then assessed motor performance after the intervention. Participants were assigned to three groups that either: (a) followed a prescribed random rhythm for their finger touches (Variable MTV), (b) followed a fixed rhythm (Fixed control MTV), or (c) produced the entire sequence following a single beep (Unsupervised control MTV). While the intervention was successful in increasing MTV during training for the Variable group, it did not lead to improved outcomes post-training compared to either control group, and the use of fixed timing led to significantly worse performance compared to the Unsupervised control group. These results suggest that manipulating MTV through auditory cues does not produce greater learning than unconstrained training in motor sequence tasks.
|
|
