Psychology Perceptual Adaptation - Lab Report Example

? Psychology Perceptual Adaptation Prism adaptation is described as a phenomenon that the motor system adapts new visuo-patial coordinates instituted by prisms that displace the actual visual fields. When the prisms are eliminated, the strength of the adaptation can be measured through spatial deviation of the motor actions in an opposite visual displacement developed by prisms, a process referred as aftereffect. This study was developed to identify the variables that have an effect on the acquisition and maintenance of the aftereffects. Subjects were expected to throw balls to a target situated in front of them before, during, and after the lateral displacement of the visual field with prismatic spectacles. The diopters of the prisms and the total count of the throws were varied among different groups of subject. Introduction Prism adaptation is studied through diverse perspectives; it can be utilized as a model for the analysis of acquisition of procedural knowledge. Procedural memory system is distinguished as an action system that has operations expressed in a manner of skilled behavioral and cognitive procedures independent from any cognition. It was noted that nondeclarative learning occurred when experience accumulated in behavioral changes without managing conscious access to any memory content. Prism adaptation is referred as a type of learning that can be classified as motor learning (Berkeley, 1709/1948). According to the perspective of this adaptation, it is evident that prism adaptation offers an important aspect for studying motor learning. This is because it can dissociate performance through learning and memory. In the experiment, the initial performance of motor learning is identified at the evaluation of any subject. The behavioral change experienced using prisms provided an estimate of the learning rate. However, when the prisms are executed, the after effect provided a measure of the persistence of the memory. It has been noted that the aftereffect is the major indicator that adaptation has occurred. Although the majority of its properties has not been clarified since aftereffect do not develop in the absence of any visuomotor interaction. The effect of varying levels of interactions between the motor and visual system on an effect of the aftereffect has not been effectively analyzed (Gregory and Wallace, 1963). However, the endurance of the aftereffect also has not been evaluated, because the aftereffect is considered exclusive as an indicator that an adaptation has occurred, and not as an independent factor. However, recently an approach concerning the classical prism experiment has been determined. The investigators usually ask those involved throwing balls at a target when they are 2 m ahead of them while they have worn glasses. Through this approach, the effects of diverse training conditions during prism adaptation on the degree of learning, the persistence of memory, and the aftereffect are determined. Method In the method, a random sample of 25 scores was expected from the Post Adaptation Data for the group that has three adaptation-training trials and a random sample of 25 scores from the Post Adaptation Data for the group that has 10 adaptation training trials. These data are trials to the criterion of 5 targets hit in a row. In addition to the recordings of the trials to criterion of each selected participants, is selected from all groups, and it records the participant number for that individual. The experiment was designed to examine the hypothesis that occurs when vision is displaced by a set of prism glasses. This has adaptation training that results to slower re-adaptation after the glasses are eliminated. During the prior phase, which was the pre-adaptation, all participants had a similar experience; they tossed the ball at the target until they hit it 5 times in a row. The main aim of the phase was to ensure that individuals adapted to the task although the data was collected. In the second phase, known as the adaptation training, participants were selected according to their date of birth. It was identified that individuals with birthdays on odd numbered days, were assigned to be in the AT 10 group. These participants attempted to hit the target 10 times during the adaptation training with the prism glasses. It was noted that it was not important if they hit the target or missed it. Individuals with birthdays on even days were placed at the AT 3 group. The participants attempted hitting the target 3 times during the adaptation training with their prism glasses on too. The third phase was the Aftereffect all individuals had a similar experience on the third phase, and they hit the target with the ball until they were able to hit it 5 times consecutively. The phase was conducted similar to the pre-adaptation phase. The main aim of the phase was to see how many trials occurred to re-adapt the coordination of eyes and hands. The data entailed of dependent variables, which will test the hypothesis (Gregory and Wallace, 1963). If the average number of trials to the criterion in the 3rd phase were significantly higher for the AT 10 group than for the AT 3 group, the hypothesis would be determined as variable. Results There is coordination determined between diverse senses. An example of this was the coordination in which the visual impression of the target is coordinated through a proprioceptive-based sense of where their hand is. After identifying a target visually, a simple matter to reach out and touch the some objects because the proprioceptive impression of where the hand is coordinated through visual senses of the location of the targets. However, a disruption occurred between the two senses if the participant wore prism spectacles that displaced their vision. When a participant thinks of where the target is located while they are wearing the glasses, they discover that they are wrong since the hand comes into view. However, on the first trial one is expected to miss their target when trying to touch or hit with an object. However, when one continues to try to hit a specific target, they learn to adjust their hand location so that they hit the displaced visual targets. After they experience, they become better and miss less until eventually they never miss the target again. Discussion These results imply on diverse conclusions concerning the prism properties adaptation and extension of mechanisms through procedural learning. It is evident that the greater the prism diopters, the greater the initial throw displacement and the more throw are required to reach asymptotic levels. This means that the motor system fails to evaluate the total displacement and to recalibrate the throws instantly (Kornheiser, 1976). This means that the motor system fails to make an evaluation on the total displacement and recalibrate the throws instantly. If the system could make automatic evaluation of the visuomotor mismatch, the adaptation of the three prism takes a similar amount of throws. However, a subject who tries to hit the target using cognitive policies, the motor performances usually embark on a similar pattern of adaptation. The results raise questions concerning why the system fails to embark on higher changes at each throw. References Berkeley, G. (1709/1948).The Works of George Berkely Bishop of Cloyne. Volume 1. An Essay Towards a New Theory of Vision, pp 141-239. (Edited by A.A. Luce). Thomas Nelson & Sons Ltd: London. Gregory, R.L., & Wallace, J.G. (1963).Recovery from Early Blindness: A Case Study. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. Kornheiser, A.S. (1976). Adaptation to Laterally Displaced Vision: A Review. Psychological Bulletin,83, 783-816. Read More