TY - JOUR
T1 - Differential effects of visual versus auditory biofeedback training for voluntary postural sway
AU - Hasegawa, Naoya
AU - Takeda, Kenta
AU - Mancini, Martina
AU - King, Laurie A.
AU - Horak, Fay B.
AU - Asaka, Tadayoshi
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding:ThisstudywassupportedbyGrant-in-Aid forEarly-CareerScientists(No.20K19371,NH)and forScientificResearch(No.18K10702,TA)from JapanSocietyforthePromotionofScience (JSPS),theNationalInstitutesofHealthunder award(No.R01AG006457,PI:FBH),and DepartmentofVeteransAffairsMeritAward(No. 5I01RX001075,PI:FBH).Thefundershadnorole instudydesign,datacollectionandanalysis, decisiontopublish,orpreparationofthe manuscript.
Funding Information:
This study was supported by Grant-in-Aid for Early-Career Scientists (No. 20K19371, NH) and for Scientific Research (No. 18K10702, TA) from Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), the National Institutes of Health under award (No. R01AG006457, PI: FBH), and Department of Veterans Affairs Merit Award (No. 5I01RX001075, PI: FBH). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Hasegawa et al.
PY - 2020/12
Y1 - 2020/12
N2 - Augmented sensory biofeedback training is often used to improve postural control. Our previous study showed that continuous auditory biofeedback was more effective than continuous visual biofeedback to improve postural sway while standing. However, it has also been reported that both discrete visual and auditory biofeedback training, presented intermittently, improves bimanual task performance more than continuous visual biofeedback training. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the relative effectiveness of discrete visual biofeedback versus discrete auditory biofeedback to improve postural control. Twenty-two healthy young adults were randomly assigned to either a visual or auditory biofeedback group. Participants were asked to shift their center of pressure (COP) by voluntary postural sway forward and backward in line with a hidden target, which moved in a sinusoidal manner and was displayed intermittently. Participants were asked to decrease the diameter of a visual circle (visual biofeedback) or the volume of a sound (auditory biofeedback) based on the distance between the COP and the target in the training session. The feedback and the target were given only when the target reached the inflection points of the sine curves. In addition, the perceptual magnitudes of visual and auditory biofeedback were equalized using Stevens' power law. Results showed that the mean and standard deviation of the distance between COP and the target were reduced int the test session, removing the augmented sensory biofeedback, in both biofeedback training groups. However, the temporal domain of the performance improved in the test session in the auditory biofeedback training group, but not in the visual biofeedback training group. In conclusion, discrete auditory biofeedback training was more effective for the motor learning of voluntarily postural swaying compared to discrete visual biofeedback training, especially in the temporal domain.
AB - Augmented sensory biofeedback training is often used to improve postural control. Our previous study showed that continuous auditory biofeedback was more effective than continuous visual biofeedback to improve postural sway while standing. However, it has also been reported that both discrete visual and auditory biofeedback training, presented intermittently, improves bimanual task performance more than continuous visual biofeedback training. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the relative effectiveness of discrete visual biofeedback versus discrete auditory biofeedback to improve postural control. Twenty-two healthy young adults were randomly assigned to either a visual or auditory biofeedback group. Participants were asked to shift their center of pressure (COP) by voluntary postural sway forward and backward in line with a hidden target, which moved in a sinusoidal manner and was displayed intermittently. Participants were asked to decrease the diameter of a visual circle (visual biofeedback) or the volume of a sound (auditory biofeedback) based on the distance between the COP and the target in the training session. The feedback and the target were given only when the target reached the inflection points of the sine curves. In addition, the perceptual magnitudes of visual and auditory biofeedback were equalized using Stevens' power law. Results showed that the mean and standard deviation of the distance between COP and the target were reduced int the test session, removing the augmented sensory biofeedback, in both biofeedback training groups. However, the temporal domain of the performance improved in the test session in the auditory biofeedback training group, but not in the visual biofeedback training group. In conclusion, discrete auditory biofeedback training was more effective for the motor learning of voluntarily postural swaying compared to discrete visual biofeedback training, especially in the temporal domain.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85098918040&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85098918040&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0244583
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0244583
M3 - Article
C2 - 33370408
AN - SCOPUS:85098918040
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 15
JO - PLoS One
JF - PLoS One
IS - 12 December
M1 - e0244583
ER -