The role of feedback in responding to gradual and abrupt visuo-proprioceptive cue conflict

Abstract

When people observe conflicting visual and proprioceptive cues about their static hand position, visuo-proprioceptive recalibration results. Recalibration also occurs during gradual or abrupt visuomotor adaptation, in response to both the cue conflict and sensory prediction errors experienced as the hand reaches to a target. Here we asked whether creating a cue conflict gradually vs. abruptly, or providing error feedback, affects recalibration in a static hand. We examined participants responses to a 70 mm visuo-proprioceptive conflict, imposed by shifting the visual cue forward from the proprioceptive cue (static left hand). Participants pointed with their unseen right hand to indicate perceived bimodal and unimodal cue positions. Conflict was introduced gradually (groups 1 and 2) or abruptly (groups 3 and 4), with performance feedback present (groups 2 and 4) or absent (groups 1 and 3). For abrupt groups, most behavioral change occurred immediately after the conflict began. No-feedback groups (1 and 3) showed comparable magnitudes of overall recalibration, indicating that abrupt and gradual conflicts result in similar recalibration but with different timings. Motor adaptation was evident in the indicator hand with performance feedback (groups 2 and 4). However, performance on a static ruler task suggests proprioceptive recalibration also occurred despite the presence of feedback. Control groups confirmed accurate performance on the pointing task despite the visual cue shift. These findings highlight the distinct timing of recalibration mechanisms for gradual versus abrupt cue conflicts and potential smaller contribution of error mechanisms for a static conflict. New and NoteworthyThe brain may handle spatial conflicts between visual and proprioceptive cues differently for a dynamic hand undergoing visuomotor adaptation than for a static hand. In a static hand, abrupt conflict triggered immediate recalibration without further adjustment, and feedback had little impact on recalibration. This suggests varying roles of multisensory and error mechanisms across motor contexts, underscoring the importance of examining a variety of motor contexts to understand and predict behavior.