Dual adaptation to different amounts or directions of prismatic displacement, or both, can be acquired and maintained with little mutual interference. Associative recalibration of the regional task- or workspace, contingent on differentiation of distinguishing sensory information, can explain such adaptation. In contrast, nonassociative realignment restores dimensional mapping among spatial representations. Methods for measuring the separate contributions of those 2 kinds of prism adaptation are identified in the present article. On the basis of a critique of dual-adaptation studies, the authors suggest that recalibration can explain the data but that the method used in those experiments confounded realignment and might have obscured the effectiveness of dual-calibration training.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Redding et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: