Augmented feedback is typically defined as performance- or outcome-related information presented to a motor skill learner in a practice environment (Schmidt & Lee, 2001). This information, which supplements naturally-occurring, task-intrinsic information, has been found to facilitate motor skill learning (Salmoni, et al., 1984). These benefits to motor learning, however, are mediated by several factors including the sensory channel (modality) in which feedback is presented. While augmented feedback presented visually does not typically produce lasting benefits to skilled performance (Sigrist et al, 2013), research in related areas suggests that augmented feedback presented in an audiovisual fashion may benefit motor learning in ways that overcome the limitations of unimodal visual research. Building off this research, the current series of experiments examined how augmented feedback presented audiovisually influenced motor learning of a simple motor task relative to augmented feedback presented either visually or aurally. The first experiment, subjects performed a novel steering task with their non-dominant hand and were tasked with staying within a pre-established boundary. During the practice phase, participants received concurrent feedback regarding their performance. Participants were then tested 24-hours post-practice to examine how feedback presented during practice would affect performance on no-feedback retention and transfer tests. Results from this study indicated that both audiovisual and aural feedback presented during practice facilitate motor learning, whereas feedback presented visually does not. In the second experiment, participants completed the steering task used in experiment one but with an additional timing component added. During practice participants were given two simultaneous streams of concurrent feedback presented either multimodally (e.g. timing information presented aurally, spatial information presented visually) or unimodally (e.g. both timing and spatial information presented aurally). Results from the second study indicated that modally-appropriate multimodal feedback facilitated motor learning to a greater degree than unimodal feedback even when multiple streams of information are presented within the augmented feedback. Theoretical and practical implications are further discussed.

Explicit and implicit processes play a role in visuomotor adaptation. (Bond & Taylor, 2015; Werner et al, 2015). The purpose of the current experiment was to investigate the potential contributions of explicit and implicit processes to visuomotor adaptation when awareness was manipulated directly and indirectly. To manipulate the degree of awareness directly, participants were assigned to a Strategy or No-Strategy group, in which they were made aware or remained unaware of the distortion respectively. They were then further subdivided into groups to train with a large (60°), medium (40°) or small (20°) visuomotor distortion, such that participants could become aware of the distortion indirectly with increasing sizes. All participants performed a reaching task to three targets with a cursor that was rotated clockwise relative to their hand by the assigned degrees, and then completed a series of no-cursor reaches without visual feedback to establish the contribution of explicit and implicit processes to visuomotor adaptation. Within the no-cursor reaching trials, the contribution of explicit and implicit processes to visuomotor adaptation were determined by having subjects reach (i) with any strategies they had gained during training (explicit + implicit processes), and (ii) as they did before training with the cursor rotation (implicit processes). Our results showed that the contribution of implicit processes to visuomotor adaptation was greater in the No-Strategy group compared to the Strategy group. Moreover, implicit processes took time to develop, and decayed following a 5-minute break. In contrast, the contribution of explicit processes was greatest in the Strategy group, and increased with rotation size in the No-Strategy group. Explicit contributions also remained consistent over Blocks, as well as when re-tested following a 5-minute break. Thus, the results of the current experiment indicate that there are notable differences in explicit and implicit contributions to visuomotor distortions depending on if, and how participants become aware of the perturbation. The results also highlight the importance of instructions when evaluating reaching performance in aftereffect trials, as they can modulate reaching errors observed.

It has been shown that the observation of two model types, or mixed-modeling, is more beneficial than watching a single type alone (Andrieux & Proteau, 2013; Robertson, 2015). Furthermore, observing others has been shown to lead to consolidation, however, the distinct behavioural outcomes are different than those following physical practice (Trempe et al., 2011). To date it is unknown, whether the observation of different model types, when interspersed with physical practice, will affect the amount of consolidation that occurs. The purpose of this research was to attempt to replicate the mixed-model benefit and to determine whether a mixed-model observation intervention would affect consolidation processes differentially compared to a single-model type alone. Forty-five university age students were randomly assigned to a mixed-model (MM), unskilled model (UM), or skilled model (SM) observation group. All participants were required to learn a waveform-matching task, in which they used their non-dominant arm to reproduce a waveform as accurately as possible within a goal movement time of 900ms. The experiment comprised three testing sessions. The first session required participants to complete a pretest, where they performed 10 trials of the skill with no knowledge of results (KR) provided. Following this, they did their first acquisition session where they received KR on all trials and performed nine blocks of 10 trials that consisted of six physical practice interspersed with four observation trials. Ten minutes following this session, participants performed an immediate retention test consisting of 10 no KR trials. The next day began with a delayed 24hr retention test of 10 no KR trials and another acquisition session. One week later, participants performed 10 no KR retention trials 10 transfer trials, in which participants reproduced a slightly different waveform under a goal movement-time of 1150ms. Root mean square error (RMSE), temporal accuracy and spatial accuracy were collected as dependent variables. Acquisition results demonstrated that all video conditions acquired the skill similarly in terms of all dependent variables. Retention results indicated a significant group by time interaction over the 24-hour retention interval (F(2, 42) = 3.809, p = .030), which showed that those in the MM group were significantly better at the 24-hour retention compared to the other groups, however, this mixed-model benefit was no longer seen at the weeklong retention. In conclusion, these results suggest that mixed-model observation is beneficial to motor learning at the 24-hour retention, in terms of temporal accuracy and also that mixed-model observation could potentially lead to enhanced consolidation of a motor skill.

This developmental study attempted to distinguish between the preference differentiation, sensorimotor differentiation and language differentiation of body parts by 3 to 6 year old children. The development of the body schema defined as the neurological model of the sensorimotor aspects of body parts was emphasized. Sixty-four children served as subjects in this study. There were eight boys and eight girls in each age category. These subjects were selected from a group of 3 to 6 year old children with play school experience at Sunset Recreation Centre. Four Task Series were administered; Task Series I was sensorimotor finger localization; Task Series II was sensorimotor hand-finger orientation; Task Series III was hand preference and foot preference; Task Series IV was the verbal understanding of body parts with respect to the right and left co-ordinates of the body. Four different experimental conditions that involved visual presentations and tactual-kinesthetic presentations for visual movement response and non-visual movement response were used in Task Series I and Task Series II. The data of Task Series I and II was submitted to bivariste frequency analysis and an analysis of variance. In Task Series III and Task Series IV age group percentiles for correct responses across trials were calculated. This data analyses indicated that the major development in the differentiation of body parts at 3 to 6 years of age is at the sensorimotor level of organization. This sensorimotor development reflected a reliance upon the tactual-kinesthetic sensory system. The results were discussed in terms of the applicability of the neurological term body schema to the research in developmental and educational psychology concerned with the developmental significance of body awareness in 3 to 6 year old children; the implications for the relationships reported between neurological disorders; and the considerations for the limited research in integrative processing. Future directions for physical education research in the developmental study of effective cues for motor learning were indicated. / Education, Faculty of / Curriculum and Pedagogy (EDCP), Department of / Graduate

The subjects who participated in this study, were twenty-one moderately mentally retarded children enrolled in Oakridge School for the mentally retarded in Vancouver, British Columbia. The I.Q. range of the subjects was approximately 30-51. The purpose of the study was to determine the effects of sensory-motor training on the visual perception and sensory-motor performances of the moderately retarded subjects. In addition, the investigation was also designed to question the claims of some proponents of perceptual-motor theory, who have suggested that improvement in the sensory-motor area leads to subsequent improvement in perceptual functioning. The subjects were divided into three groups of seven. Each group was then randomly distributed into one of three treatments. The treatments consisted of two sensory-motor training groups and a control group. The sensory-motor treatments consisted of one program based on the widely-practiced Kephart approach; the second was a series of activities designed by the experimenter. These two training programs allowed for a comparison of the relative effects of the individual treatments on the performance of the subjects. The two activity groups were subjected to thirty half-hour sessions of sensory-motor training over a seven and one-half week period. The control group spent a concurrent amount of time involved in regular special education classroom activities. The Frostig Test of Visual Perception and the Purdue Perceptual-Motor Survey were administered prior to and after the training period. The results were then statistically analysed by a complex analysis of variance and the Scheffe Technique. The following main conclusions were drawn. 1. In the area of visual perception, sensory-motor training was no more effective than regular special education activities in improving performance. 2. Sensory-motor training resulted in performance gains in the sensory-motor area. 3. Improvements in sensory-motor performance did not result in subsequent gains in the visual perception performance. 4. The two programs of sensory-motor training produced similar performances in both the visual perception and sensory-motor areas. / Education, Faculty of / Curriculum and Pedagogy (EDCP), Department of / Graduate

GABAergic inhibitory neurons are known to play a critical regulatory role in memory formation and learning. During motor learning, pyramidal neurons (PNs) of the primary motor cortex (M1) undergo spine reorganization and firing pattern refinement. Cortical PNs are directly inhibited and regulated by two inhibitory neuronal subtypes: somatostatin-expressing interneurons (SOM-INs) and parvalbumin-expressing interneurons (PV-INs). Interestingly, SOM-mediated inhibition has been shown to regulate the observed dynamics of PNs during motor learning. Despite our expanded understanding, the molecular mechanisms that underlie these processes remain unclear. Here, I identified that the immediate-early gene transcription factor, NPAS4, is selectively expressed in a subset of SOM-INs, but not in PV-INs or PNs, during the head-fixed pellet reaching motor learning task. Furthermore, I characterized its expression pattern within the SOM-INs of M1 and found that there was no change at early phases; but as training progressed, there was a gradual increase and plateau in the number of NPAS4-expressing SOM-INs. In collaboration with other lab members, we showed that Npas4 region- and cell-type specific deletion within SOM-INs of M1, impaired motor skill acquisition and disrupted the motor learning-induced spine reorganization. In addition, I validated and employed the novel NRAM system to examine if NPAS4 is continually expressed within the same subset of SOM-INs and found that an ensemble of SOM-INs repetitively express NPAS4 at various phases of learning. Lastly, chronic in vivo two-photon Ca²⁺ imaging during training showed that the ensemble of NPAS4-expressing SOM-INs had reduced activity during task-related movements compared to other SOM-INs. Together, our results reveal an important instructive role of NPAS4 within the microcircuits of M1, in which it modulates the inhibition of a distinct subset of SOM-INs during motor learning to promote spine stabilization of downstream task-related PNs that are important for motor skill acquisition.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Striatal-mediated pathological disease-states such as Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), Parkinson’s Disease (PD), and psychostimulant drug addiction/abuse are coupled with distinct motor movement abnormalities. In addition, these disorders are associated with perturbed synaptic transmission. Proper synaptic transmission is critical for maintaining neuronal communication. Furthermore, in many striatal-dependent disease-states, the principle striatal neurons, medium spiny neurons (MSNs), exhibit differential perturbations in downstream signaling. Signal transduction pathways that are localized to the glutamatergic post-synaptic density (PSD) of GABAergic MSNs regulate protein phosphorylation in a tightly controlled manner. Alterations in the control of this phosphorylation in striatal MSNs are observed in myriad striatal pathological diseasestates and can give rise to perturbations in synaptic transmission. While serine/threonine kinases obtain substrate specificity, in part, by phosphorylating specific consensus sites, serine/threonine phosphatases such as protein phosphatase 1 (PP1) are much more promiscuous. To obtain substrate selectivity, PP1 associates with targeting proteins. The major targeting protein for PP1 in the PSD of striatal dendritic spines is spinophilin. Spinophilin not only binds PP1, but also concurrently interacts with myriad synaptic proteins. Interestingly, dopamine depletion, an animal model of PD, modulates spinophilin protein-protein interactions in the striatum. However, spinophilin function on basal striatal-mediated motor behaviors such as the rotarod or under hyperdopaminergic states such as those observed following psychostimulant-induced behavioral sensitization are less well characterized. To elucidate spinophilin function more specifically, we have generated multiple transgenic animals that allow for cell type-specific loss of spinophilin as well as cell-specific interrogation of spinophilin protein interactions. Here, I report the functional role of spinophilin in regulating striatal mediated motor behaviors and functional changes associated with amphetamine-induced locomotor sensitization. In addition, we define changes in spinophilin protein-protein interactions that may mediate these behavioral changes. Furthermore, global loss of spinophilin abrogates amphetamine-induced sensitization and plays a critical role in striatal motor learning and performance. The data suggest that the striatal spinophilin protein interactome is upregulated in MSNs following psychostimulant administration. In addition, loss of spinophilin changes protein expression in myriad psychostimulant-mediated striatal adaptations. Taken together the data suggests that spinophilin’s protein-protein interactions in the striatum are obligate for appropriate striatal mediated motor function.

The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two free throw shooting methods, the Ed Palubinskas Method (PM) and the Free Shoot Method (FSM), and their ability to improve free throw shooting accuracy. The experimental group, using the PM, and the control group, using the FSM, shot the same amount of free throws over a 13 week period. Subjects were 33 male intermediate basketball students at Brigham Young University. Subjects in both groups shot 26 free throws twice a week. Subjects were tested once every other week by shooting and recording the amount made out of nine attempts. There was no significant improvement for trials for both groups over the 13 weeks (F=1.583, p=.154). There was also no significant difference between groups (F=.445, p=.510) nor any interaction between groups (F=.642, p=.696). There was no significant difference in free throw shooting accuracy between the PM and FSM for the selected groups.

There has been growing interest in the role of motivation in motor learning, and specifically how autonomy, competence, and intrinsic motivation may directly benefit the skill acquisition process. Within the autonomy branch of the motivation pillar in OPTIMAL theory, supporting a learner’s basic psychological need for autonomy contributes to a virtuous cycle that enhances expectancies for success (i.e., perceptions of competence) and in turn facilitates motor performance and learning. Although many experiments have concluded support for OPTIMAL theory, these studies have often relied on small sample sizes, have not been pre-registered, and have consistently failed to include appropriate measures that assess key predictions in the theory. The purpose of this dissertation was to address these methodological limitations and test core predictions in the OPTIMAL theory regarding the direct and causal role of autonomy-supportive practice conditions—control over practice and instructional language—on motor performance and learning. Experiments 1 and 2 (Chapter 2) critically tested between the information-processing and motivation-based (i.e., OPTIMAL theory) explanations of the self-controlled learning advantage by providing participants in choice and yoked groups with error or graded feedback (Experiment 1) and binary feedback (Experiment 2). Results showed no self-controlled learning advantage and exercising choice in practice did not increase perceptions of autonomy, competence, or intrinsic motivation, nor did it improve error estimation accuracy. Although these findings are difficult to reconcile with either explanation, they are consistent with a growing body of evidence suggesting self-controlled conditions are not advantageous for motor learning. Experiment 3 addressed a methodological limitation of past self-controlled learning research by including a novel yoked group that was explicitly told they were being denied choice and that their observation schedule was created by another participant. Results showed no self-controlled learning advantage despite finding higher perceptions of autonomy in the choice group. These findings are consistent with Experiments 1 and 2, and further questions the causal role of autonomy-support on motor learning and the robustness of the so-called self-controlled learning advantage. Experiment 4 investigated the influence of different instructional language styles on skill acquisition. Throughout practice participants received task instructions that used either autonomy-supportive or controlling language. Results showed no performance differences in acquisition or retention despite finding higher perceptions of autonomy and competence in the autonomy-supportive group. These findings are inconsistent with key predictions in OPTIMAL theory regarding the role of autonomy in motor learning. / Dissertation / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / Practice environments that provide learners with autonomy have been argued to be more effective for learning new motor skills compared to more controlling environments. Two techniques that can be used to create autonomy-supportive learning environments are giving learners control over a feature of their practice or the language used when giving task instructions. This dissertation addresses knowledge gaps and several methodological limitations of previous literature by measuring key psychological variables, the use of novel experimental groups, large N studies, modern statistical techniques, and open science practices. Findings showed that under many conditions perceptions of autonomy and competence can be impacted positively; however, these psychological benefits do not reliably translate into superior motor performance or learning. Collectively, results of this dissertation challenge mainstream perspectives regarding a direct and causal role of motivational influences on motor skill acquisition.

Sequential movements have become a common experimental paradigm for evaluating the neural correlates of motor learning. Currently, the understanding is that motor sequence learning engages the cortico-cerebellar and cortico-striatal networks and that their contributions differ depending on the stage of learning. The prefrontal cortex (PFC), in particular, has been observed at the early/fast phase and late/slow phase of motor sequence learning, suggesting involvement in processes such as movement automaticity, stimulus-response conflicts, explicit learning, and retrieval, to name a few. However, it is difficult for neuroimaging studies to evaluate the relative permanence of motor sequence learning due to the financial burden associated with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET). In this dissertation, four experiments were performed to examine the functionality of functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) in elucidating the role of the PFC in motor sequence learning and movement automaticity. The first experiment (Chapter 2) focused on validating fNIRS as a comparable technique to fMRI by replicating a previous motor sequence learning study (Wu et al., 2004) that reported decreased activity in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) following achievement of movement automaticity. The fNIRS findings were unable to detect a similar decrease in the left DLPFC. The second experiment (Chapter 3) further investigated the cerebral oxygenation changes in the PFC following motor sequence learning. To enable better distinction between learning and performance, this experiment including multiple motor sequence tasks, a control group, four practice sessions and a retention phase. The findings revealed increased contributions from the right hemisphere (e.g., right ventrolateral PFC (VLPFC)) and the suggestion that the left DLPFC may not reflect movement automaticity but rather attentional investment in movement preparation. To address the signal processing concerns observed in experiment one and two, the third experiment (Chapter 4) investigated the effect of five motion correction techniques on the statistical outcomes of a motor sequence learning experiment. Additionally, the corrections were evaluated to determine which would yield the greatest improvement in hemodynamic response function (HRF) recovery and within-subject standard deviation. The findings revealed the location of significance to vary depending on the motion correction applied. Also, wavelet and spline + wavelet demonstrated limited improvement in reducing within-subject standard deviation. Lastly, the fourth experiment (Chapter 5) examined changes in the PFC associated with dual-task processing before and after motor sequence learning. Findings revealed decreased activity in the right DLPFC, medial PFC (mPFC), and orbitofrontal cortex following practice for dual-task sequence-4. A similar but marginal trend was observed in the right VLPFC. Minimal significance was observed during the dual-task sequence-12 task. Collectively, the findings of this dissertation suggest that 1) motor sequence learning when acquired with explicit knowledge requires contribution from predominately the right hemisphere, 2) the left DLPFC may represent attentional investment in movement preparation rather than movement automaticity, 3) the neural representations of dual-task processing are associated with the complexity of the motor sequence task, and 4) low-frequency motion artifacts may be difficult to remove using certain signal processing methods.