Influence of switching rule on motor learning
Abstract
Humans and animals can flexibly switch rules to generate appropriate motor commands; for example, actions can be flexibly produced toward a sensory stimulus (e.g., pro-saccade or pro-reaching) or away from a sensory stimulus (e.g., anti-saccade or anti-reaching). Distinct neural activities are related to pro- and anti-movement actions; however, the effects of switching rules on motor learning are unclear. Here, we study the effect of switching rules on motor learning using pro- and anti-arm-reaching movements and a visuomotor rotation task. Although previous results support the perfect availability of learning effects under the same required movements, we show that the learning effects trained in pro-reaching movements are partially rather than perfectly available in anti-reaching movements even under the same required movement direction between those two conditions. The partial transfer is independent of the difference in the visual cue, the cognitive demand, and the actual movement direction between the pro- and anti-reaching movements. We further demonstrate that the availability of learning effects trained with pro-reaching movements is partial not only in anti-reaching movements but in reaching movements with other rules and the availability of learning effects trained with anti-reaching movements is also partial in pro-reaching movements. We thus conclude that the switching rule causes the availability of learning effects to be partial rather than perfect even under same planned movements.\n\nNew & Noteworthy\n\nMost motor learning experiments supported the involvement of planned movement directions in motor learning; the learning effects trained in a movement direction can be available at movement directions close to the trained one. Here, we show that the availability of motor learning effects is partial rather than perfect even under the same planned movements when rule is switched, which indicates that sports training and rehabilitation should include various situations under the same required motions.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 11
- FWCI
- 1.04
- Field percentile
- top 25%
- Organism
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Switching between newly learned motor skills
Kahori Kita, Yue Du, … Adrian Mark Haith·Journal of NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Nov 10, 2025
- Target configuration determines how and what we learn during sensorimotor adaptation
Pamela Villavicencio, Jonathan Sanching Tsay, Cristina de la Malla·npj Science of LearningPeer-reviewed·Dec 16, 2025
- A rapid visuomotor response on the human upper limb is selectively influenced by implicit, but not explicit, motor learning
Chao Gu, J. Andrew Pruszynski, … Brian D. Corneil·Journal of NeurophysiologyPeer-reviewed·Nov 14, 2018
- Imagery of movements immediately following performance allows learning of motor skills that interfere
H. R. Sheahan, J. N. Ingram, … D. M. Wolpert·bioRxiv·Aug 4, 2018
- "Leap before you look": Conditions that promote implicit visuomotor adaptation without explicit learning
Tejas Savalia, Rosemary A. Cowell, David E. Huber·bioRxiv·Jul 12, 2022
- Instrumental-Motor Transfer: The Relative Value of Competing Movement Goals Modulates Implicit Motor Learning
Naser Al-Fawakhiri, Vikram S. Chib, Samuel D. McDougle·bioRxiv·Sep 24, 2026