Human movement strategies in uncertain environments: A synergy-based approach to the stability-agility tradeoff

IF 1.6 3区 心理学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Anvesh Naik , Ruchika Iqbal , Sébastien Hélie , Satyajit Ambike
{"title":"Human movement strategies in uncertain environments: A synergy-based approach to the stability-agility tradeoff","authors":"Anvesh Naik ,&nbsp;Ruchika Iqbal ,&nbsp;Sébastien Hélie ,&nbsp;Satyajit Ambike","doi":"10.1016/j.humov.2024.103259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Humans frequently prepare for agile movements by decreasing stability. This facilitates transitions between movements but increases vulnerability to external disruptions. Therefore, humans might weigh the risk of disruption against the gain in agility and scale their stability to the likelihood of having to perform an agility-demanding action. We used the theory of motor synergies to investigate how humans manage this stability-agility tradeoff under uncertainty. This theory has long quantified stability using the synergy index, and reduction in stability before movement transitions using anticipatory synergy adjustment (ASA). However, the impact of uncertainty - whether a quick action should be executed or inhibited - on ASA is unknown. Furthermore, the impact of ASA on execution and inhibition of the action is unclear.</p><p>We combined multi-finger, isometric force production with the go/no-go paradigm. Thirty participants performed constant force (no-go task), rapid force pulse (go task), and randomized go and no-go trials (go/no-go task) in response to visual cues. We measured the pre-cue finger forces and computed ASA using the uncontrolled manifold method and quantified the spatio-temporal features of the force after the visual cue. We expected ASA in both go/no-go and go tasks, but larger ASA for the latter.</p><p>Surprisingly, we observed ASA only for the go task. For the go/no-go task, 53% of participants <em>increased</em> stability before the cue. The high stability hindered performance, leading to increased errors in no-go trials and lower peak forces in go trials. These results align with the stability-agility tradeoff. It is puzzling why some participants increased stability even though 80% of the trials demanded agility. This study indicates that individual differences in the effect of task uncertainty and motor inhibition on ASA is unexplored in motor synergy theory and presents a method for further development.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55046,"journal":{"name":"Human Movement Science","volume":"97 ","pages":"Article 103259"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Movement Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167945724000824","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Humans frequently prepare for agile movements by decreasing stability. This facilitates transitions between movements but increases vulnerability to external disruptions. Therefore, humans might weigh the risk of disruption against the gain in agility and scale their stability to the likelihood of having to perform an agility-demanding action. We used the theory of motor synergies to investigate how humans manage this stability-agility tradeoff under uncertainty. This theory has long quantified stability using the synergy index, and reduction in stability before movement transitions using anticipatory synergy adjustment (ASA). However, the impact of uncertainty - whether a quick action should be executed or inhibited - on ASA is unknown. Furthermore, the impact of ASA on execution and inhibition of the action is unclear.

We combined multi-finger, isometric force production with the go/no-go paradigm. Thirty participants performed constant force (no-go task), rapid force pulse (go task), and randomized go and no-go trials (go/no-go task) in response to visual cues. We measured the pre-cue finger forces and computed ASA using the uncontrolled manifold method and quantified the spatio-temporal features of the force after the visual cue. We expected ASA in both go/no-go and go tasks, but larger ASA for the latter.

Surprisingly, we observed ASA only for the go task. For the go/no-go task, 53% of participants increased stability before the cue. The high stability hindered performance, leading to increased errors in no-go trials and lower peak forces in go trials. These results align with the stability-agility tradeoff. It is puzzling why some participants increased stability even though 80% of the trials demanded agility. This study indicates that individual differences in the effect of task uncertainty and motor inhibition on ASA is unexplored in motor synergy theory and presents a method for further development.

不确定环境中的人类运动策略:基于协同作用的稳定性与敏捷性权衡方法。
人类经常通过降低稳定性来为敏捷运动做准备。这有利于动作之间的转换,但却增加了对外部干扰的脆弱性。因此,人类可能会权衡中断的风险和敏捷性的收益,并根据必须执行要求敏捷性的动作的可能性来调整其稳定性。我们利用运动协同理论来研究人类如何在不确定情况下权衡稳定性和敏捷性。长期以来,该理论一直使用协同指数来量化稳定性,并使用预期协同调整(ASA)来量化运动转换前稳定性的降低。然而,不确定性--是执行还是抑制快速行动--对 ASA 的影响尚不清楚。此外,ASA 对动作执行和抑制的影响也不清楚。我们将多指等长发力与 "去/不去 "范式相结合。30 名参与者根据视觉提示分别进行了恒定力(不做任务)、快速力脉冲(做任务)以及随机的做和不做试验(做/不做任务)。我们测量了提示前的指力,使用非控制流形法计算了ASA,并量化了视觉提示后指力的时空特征。我们预期在 "走/不走 "和 "走 "任务中都会出现 ASA,但后者的 ASA 更大。令人惊讶的是,我们只在走的任务中观察到了ASA。在 "走/不走 "任务中,53% 的参与者在视觉提示之前增加了稳定性。高稳定性阻碍了表现,导致在不走的试验中错误增加,而在走的试验中峰值力降低。这些结果与稳定性和敏捷性的权衡相一致。令人费解的是,尽管有 80% 的试验需要敏捷性,但为什么有些参与者却增加了稳定性。这项研究表明,任务的不确定性和运动抑制对 ASA 的影响存在个体差异,这在运动协同理论中尚未得到探讨,并提出了一种有待进一步发展的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Human Movement Science
Human Movement Science 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
4.80%
发文量
89
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: Human Movement Science provides a medium for publishing disciplinary and multidisciplinary studies on human movement. It brings together psychological, biomechanical and neurophysiological research on the control, organization and learning of human movement, including the perceptual support of movement. The overarching goal of the journal is to publish articles that help advance theoretical understanding of the control and organization of human movement, as well as changes therein as a function of development, learning and rehabilitation. The nature of the research reported may vary from fundamental theoretical or empirical studies to more applied studies in the fields of, for example, sport, dance and rehabilitation with the proviso that all studies have a distinct theoretical bearing. Also, reviews and meta-studies advancing the understanding of human movement are welcome. These aims and scope imply that purely descriptive studies are not acceptable, while methodological articles are only acceptable if the methodology in question opens up new vistas in understanding the control and organization of human movement. The same holds for articles on exercise physiology, which in general are not supported, unless they speak to the control and organization of human movement. In general, it is required that the theoretical message of articles published in Human Movement Science is, to a certain extent, innovative and not dismissible as just "more of the same."
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信