Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 173, Issue 3, pp 415–424 | Cite as

Long-lasting aftereffect of a single prism adaptation: shifts in vision and proprioception are independent

  • Yohko HatadaEmail author
  • Yves Rossetti
  • R. Chris Miall
Research Article


After a single adaptation session to prisms with gradually incremented shift magnitude, the prism adaptation aftereffect was measured by open loop mid-sagittal pointing (O) to a visual target without visual feedback. This aftereffect corresponded to the summation of the shift in proprioception, measured by straight ahead pointing without vision (S), and the visual straight ahead judgement (V), measured by verbal stopping of an LED moving from two opposite directions. However, the measurement of the aftereffects made over a period of 7 days revealed significantly different decay curves in V, O and S. Surprisingly the S shift was still present up to 7 days after the training, while V had returned to the original level by 2 h, which was the first measurement after subjects returned to a normal visual environment. O had returned to pre-test level after 1 day. After 3 days Wilkinson’s (J Exp Psychol 89:250–257, 1971) additive hypothesis (O=SV) no longer fit the data. Rather “O=Pl−V”, where Pl (Pr) is the shift in proprioception measured by passive lateral arm movements from left (right), fitted better during the whole 7 days of aftereffect in our study. Therefore, the aftereffect of our strong prism adaptation revealed, firstly, that classical open loop pointing consisted of aftereffect shifts equal to the summation of the shifts in the two passively measurable aftereffect components, vision (V) and proprioception (Pl), rather than with active straight ahead pointing (S). Secondly, the decay of the shift in visual perception and in passively measurable proprioception is independent. The former decays fast, and the latter decays slowly with two separate waves. Thirdly, we suggest that the use of visual perception-dependent spatial codes for visual-manual transformation and the vision-independent internal egocentric reference frame are mutually exclusive. We proposed a model to explain these possible mechanisms.


Visuo-motor Visuo-sensory Sensory-motor Long-term plasticity Internal representation 



Neural network coding motor control and effecter response for movement from left,


Neural network coding motor control and effecter response for movement from right,


Neural network coding calibrated perceptual proprioception by movement from left,


Neural network coding calibrated perceptual proprioception by movement from right,


Neural network coding calibrated perceptual visual space,


Internal egocentric reference frame,


Early long-term plasticity (including potentiation and depression),


Late long-term plasticity (including potentiation and depression),


Open loop pointing test,


Passive proprioceptive straight ahead test from left arm movement,


Passive proprioceptive straight ahead test from right arm movement,


Straight ahead pointing test,


Visual straight ahead test averaged from the two directions of LED movement,


Visual straight ahead test from left LED movement,


Visual straight ahead test from right LED movement,


Visuo-manual transformation.


  1. Boyden ES, Katoh A, Raymond JL (2004) Cerebellum-dependent learning: the role of multiple plasticity mechanisms (Review). Annu Rev Neurosci 27:581–609CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Choe CS, Welch RB (1974) Varuables affecting the intermanual transfer and decay of prism adaptation. J Exp Pshychol 102:1076–1084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Farnè A, Ponti F, Ladavas E (1998) In search of biased egocentric reference frames in neglect. Neuropsychologia 36:611–623CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Ferber S, Karnath HO (1999) Parietal and occipital lobe contributions to perception of straight ahead orientation. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr 67:572–578PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Harris CS (1963) Adaptation to displaced vision: visual, motor, or proprioceptive change? Science 140:812–813PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hatada Y, Rossetti Y (2004a) Long-lasting prism-adaptation aftereffects: Shift in open-loop midsagittal pointing involves more than just visual and proprioceptive components. Perception 33(Suppl.):140–140Google Scholar
  7. Hatada Y, Rossetti Y (2004b) Prism adaptation generates a very long lasting-directionally biased proprioceptive shift in healthy subjects. Abstr Soc Neurosci 524:12Google Scholar
  8. Hatada Y, Wu F, Sun ZY, Schacher S, Goldberg DJ (2000) Presynaptic morphological changes associated with long-term synaptic facilitation are triggered by actin polymerization at preexisting varicosities. J Neurosci 20:RC82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Hatada Y, Miall RC, Rossetti Y (2005) Two waves of long lasting prism adaptation over 7 days. Exp Brain Res (Epub on 18th Nov 2005)Google Scholar
  10. Hay J, Pick HL Jr (1966) Visual and proprioceptive adaptation to optical displacement of the visual stimulus. J Exp Psychol 71:150–158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kandel ER (2001) The molecular biology of memory storage: a dialogue between genes and synapses (Review). Science 294:1030–1038CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Karnath HO, Schenkel P, Fischer B (1991) Trunk orientation as the determining factor of the ‘contralateral’ deficit in the neglect syndrome and as the physical anchor of the internal representation of body orientation in space. Brain 114:1997–2014PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Redding GM, Wallace B (1978) Sources of “overadditivity” in prism adaptation. Percept Psychophys 24:58–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Redding GM, Wallace B (1992) Effects of pointing rate and availability of visual feedback on visual and proprioceptive components of prism adaptation. J Mot Behav 24:226–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Redding GM, Wallace B (1993) Adaptive coordination and alignment of eye and hand. J Mot Behav 25:75–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Redding GM, Wallace B (1996) Adaptive spatial alignment and strategic perceptual-motor control. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 22:379–394PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Redding GM, Wallace B (1997a) Adaptive spatial alignment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  18. Redding GM, Wallace B (1997b) Prism adaptation during target pointing from visible and nonvisible starting locations. J Mot Behav 29:119–130Google Scholar
  19. Redding GM, Wallace B (2000) Prism exposure aftereffects and direct effects for different movement and feedback times. J Mot Behav 32:83–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rock I, Harris CS (1967) Vision and touch. Sci Am 216:96–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rossetti Y, Rode G, Pisella L, Farnè A, Li L, Boisson D, Perenin MT (1998) Prism adaptation to a rightward optical deviation rehabilitates left hemispatial neglect. Nature 395:166–169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Sekiyama K, Miyauchi S, Imaruoka T, Egusa H, Tashiro T (2000) Body image as a visuomotor transformation device revealed in adaptation to reversed vision. Nature 407:374–377CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Shimojo S, Nakajima Y (1981) Adaptation to the reversal of binocular depth cues: effects of wearing left-right reversing spectacles on stereoscopic depth perception. Perception 10:391–402PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Takehara K, Kawahara S, Kirino Y (2003) Time-dependent reorganization of the brain components underlying memory retention in trace eyeblink conditioning. J Neurosci 23:9897–9905PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Walker MP (2005) A refined model of sleep and the time course of memory formation. Behav Brain Sci 28:51–64CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Wallace B (1977) Stability of Wilkinson’s linear model of prism adaptation over time for various targets. Perception 6:145–151PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wallace B, Redding GM (1979) Additivity in prism adaptation as manifested in intermanual and interocular transfer. Percept Psychophys 25:133–136PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Welch RB (1978) Perceptual modification: adaptating to altered sensory environments. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Welch RB (1986) Adaptation of space perception. In: Boff KR, Kaufman L, Thomas JR (eds) Handbook of perception and human performance, vol. 1: sensory processes and perception. Wiley, New York, pp 24.1–24.45Google Scholar
  30. Welch RB, Choe CS, Heinrich DR (1974) Evidence for a three-component model of prism adaptation. J Exp Psychol 103:700–705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wilkinson DA (1971) Visual-motor control loop: a linear system? J Exp Psychol 89:250–257PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yohko Hatada
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Yves Rossetti
    • 1
    • 3
  • R. Chris Miall
    • 4
  1. 1.Espace et Action, Unit 534 INSERMInstitut Fédératif des Neurosciences de Lyon BronLyon BronFrance
  2. 2.Institute of Cognitive NeuroscienceUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  3. 3.Mouvement et Handicap, Rééducation Neurologique, Hôpital Henry Gabrielle, Hospices Civils de LyonUniversité Claude BernardSt Genis LavalFrance
  4. 4.Behavioural Brain Sciences, PsychologyUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations