Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
ARTICLE, Behavioral/Systems

Kinematics and Dynamics Are Not Represented Independently in Motor Working Memory: Evidence from an Interference Study

Christine Tong, Daniel M. Wolpert and J. Randall Flanagan
Journal of Neuroscience 1 February 2002, 22 (3) 1108-1113; https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.22-03-01108.2002
Christine Tong
1Department of Psychology and Centre for Neuroscience Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, K7L 3N6, Canada, and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel M. Wolpert
2Sobell Department of Neurophysiology, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. Randall Flanagan
1Department of Psychology and Centre for Neuroscience Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, K7L 3N6, Canada, and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Fig. 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 1.

    Experimental setup. Subjects moved a force-reflecting manipulandum between targets in a horizontal plane. The targets were virtual spheres presented using a three-dimensional projection system with shutter glasses. The force exerted by the manipulandum was servo-controlled to create a position-dependent rotary force field, and visual feedback was altered to create a position-dependent visuomotor rotation.

  • Fig. 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 2.

    Performance in the first and last cycles under the visuomotor rotation (a) and elastic force field with visual feedback (b). The gray curves show the individual paths of the cursor representing hand position for a single subject (different subjects are shown ina and b). The straight solid lines indicate the direction and extent of the corresponding targets. For the first cycle, two movement paths (directed to opposing targets) are shown in each plot. For the last cycle, all eight paths are shown in one plot. Because the force field was presented after adaptation to the visuomotor rotation, subjects initially directed their movements 30° clockwise to the targets. These rotated directions are indicated by the straight dashed lines inb. In the first cycle, large errors were observed under both transformations. However, after 30 cycles, these errors were greatly reduced.

  • Fig. 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 3.

    Adaptation to the visuomotor rotation. Curves show mean angular error (between movement and target directions) as a function of cycle on day 1 (solid lines) and day 2 (dashed lines). The height of the gray area represents ±1 SE. a shows results for the control group, who adapted only to the visuomotor rotation on day 1.b and c show results from two groups, who on day 1 adapted to the visuomotor rotation and 5 min later adapted to the position-dependent rotary force field either with (a) or without (b) visual feedback. The two groups exposed to the force field on day 1 exhibited greater directional errors at the start of day 2 than did the control group.

  • Fig. 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 4.

    Initial and final angular errors under the visuomotor rotation. The height of each white barrepresents the angular error averaged over the second and third cycles; the height of each gray bar represents the corresponding angular error averaged over the 29th and 30th cycles. The bars outlined with solid and dashed lines represent days 1 and 2, respectively. Separate means are reported for each of the three experimental groups. Vertical lines represent the SE.

  • Fig. 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 5.

    Adaptation to the elastic rotary force field.a, Distance traveled by the hand as a function of cycle (normalized for maximum displacement of the hand). Thedashed and solid lines represent mean distances for the visual feedback and no-visual-feedback groups, respectively. The height of the gray area around thedashed curve and the gray linearound the solid curve represent ±1 SE.b, Corresponding mean angular errors for the two groups. For both groups, the magnitude of the angular error decreased as the visuomotor rotation previously adapted to was gradually unlearned during adaptation to the force field.

Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 22 (3)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 22, Issue 3
1 Feb 2002
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Kinematics and Dynamics Are Not Represented Independently in Motor Working Memory: Evidence from an Interference Study
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Kinematics and Dynamics Are Not Represented Independently in Motor Working Memory: Evidence from an Interference Study
Christine Tong, Daniel M. Wolpert, J. Randall Flanagan
Journal of Neuroscience 1 February 2002, 22 (3) 1108-1113; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.22-03-01108.2002

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Kinematics and Dynamics Are Not Represented Independently in Motor Working Memory: Evidence from an Interference Study
Christine Tong, Daniel M. Wolpert, J. Randall Flanagan
Journal of Neuroscience 1 February 2002, 22 (3) 1108-1113; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.22-03-01108.2002
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • motor learning
  • internal models
  • arm movement
  • visuomotor rotation
  • force field
  • motor memory

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

ARTICLE

  • Neural Correlates of Competing Fear Behaviors Evoked by an Innately Aversive Stimulus
  • Distinct Developmental Modes and Lesion-Induced Reactions of Dendrites of Two Classes of Drosophila Sensory Neurons
  • Functional Dissociation among Components of Remembering: Control, Perceived Oldness, and Content
Show more ARTICLE

Behavioral/Systems

  • Neural Correlates of Competing Fear Behaviors Evoked by an Innately Aversive Stimulus
  • Distinct Developmental Modes and Lesion-Induced Reactions of Dendrites of Two Classes of Drosophila Sensory Neurons
  • Functional Dissociation among Components of Remembering: Control, Perceived Oldness, and Content
Show more Behavioral/Systems
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.