Floris Tijmen Van Vugt

Prof. Floris Tijmen Van Vugt

University of Montreal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 February 2016 in NeuroImage
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LVLucía Vaquero
Lucía Vaquero
KHKarl Hartmann
Karl Hartmann
PRPablo Ripollés
Pablo Ripollés
NRNuria Rojo
Nuria Rojo
JSJoanna Sierpowska
Joanna Sierpowska
Eckart AltenmuellerEckart Altenmueller
Eckart Altenmueller

1 January 2014 in Parkinsonism & Related Disorders
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Floris Tijmen Van VugtFloris Tijmen Van Vugt
Floris Tijmen Van Vugt
LBL. Boullet
L. Boullet
HJH.-C. Jabusch
H.-C. Jabusch
Eckart AltenmuellerEckart Altenmueller
Eckart Altenmueller

1 December 2018 in Journal of Neurophysiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Ananda SIDARTAAnanda SIDARTA
Ananda SIDARTA
Floris Tijmen Van VugtFloris Tijmen Van Vugt
Floris Tijmen Van Vugt
DODavid J. Ostry
David J. Ostry
Recent studies using visuomotor adaptation and sequence learning tasks have assessed the involvement of working memory in the visuospatial domain. The capacity to maintain previously performed movements in working memory is perhaps even more important in reinforcement-based learning to repeat accurate movements and avoid mistakes. Using this kind of task in the present work, we tested the relationship between somatosensory working memory and motor learning. The first experiment involved separate memory and motor learning tasks. In the memory task, the participant’s arm was displaced in different directions by a robotic arm, and the participant was asked to judge whether a subsequent test direction was one of the previously presented directions. In the motor learning task, participants made reaching movements to a hidden visual target and were provided with positive feedback as reinforcement when the movement ended in the target zone. It was found that participants that had better somatosensory working memory showed greater motor learning. In a second experiment, we designed a new task in which learning and working memory trials were interleaved, allowing us to study participants’ memory for movements they performed as part of learning. As in the first experiment, we found that participants with better somatosensory working memory also learned more. Moreover, memory performance for successful movements was better than for movements that failed to reach the target. These results suggest that somatosensory working memory is involved in reinforcement motor learning and that this memory preferentially keeps track of reinforced movements. NEW & NOTEWORTHY The present work examined somatosensory working memory in reinforcement-based motor learning. Working memory performance was reliably correlated with the extent of learning. With the use of a paradigm in which learning and memory trials were interleaved, memory was assessed for movements performed during learning. Movements that received positive feedback were better remembered than movements that did not. Thus working memory does not track all movements equally but is biased to retain movements that were rewarded.


3 February 2014 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Floris Tijmen Van VugtFloris Tijmen Van Vugt
Floris Tijmen Van Vugt
BTBarbara Tillmann
Barbara Tillmann
The human brain is able to predict the sensory effects of its actions. But how precise are these predictions? The present research proposes a tool to measure thresholds between a simple action (keystroke) and a resulting sound. On each trial, participants were required to press a key. Upon each keystroke, a woodblock sound was presented. In some trials, the sound came immediately with the downward keystroke; at other times, it was delayed by a varying amount of time. Participants were asked to verbally report whether the sound came immediately or was delayed. Participants' delay detection thresholds (in msec) were measured with a staircase-like procedure. We hypothesised that musicians would have a lower threshold than non-musicians. Comparing pianists and brass players, we furthermore hypothesised that, as a result of a sharper attack of the timbre of their instrument, pianists might have lower thresholds than brass players. Our results show that non-musicians exhibited higher thresholds for delay detection (180±104 ms) than the two groups of musicians (102±65 ms), but there were no differences between pianists and brass players. The variance in delay detection thresholds could be explained by variance in sensorimotor synchronisation capacities as well as variance in a purely auditory temporal irregularity detection measure. This suggests that the brain's capacity to generate temporal predictions of sensory consequences can be decomposed into general temporal prediction capacities together with auditory-motor coupling. These findings indicate that the brain has a relatively large window of integration within which an action and its resulting effect are judged as simultaneous. Furthermore, musical expertise may narrow this window down, potentially due to a more refined temporal prediction. This novel paradigm provides a simple test to estimate the temporal precision of auditory-motor action-effect coupling, and the paradigm can readily be incorporated in studies investigating both healthy and patient populations.

25 July 2014 in Experimental Brain Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Floris Tijmen Van VugtFloris Tijmen Van Vugt
Floris Tijmen Van Vugt
SFShinichi Furuya
Shinichi Furuya
HVHenning Vauth
Henning Vauth
HJHans-Christian Jabusch
Hans-Christian Jabusch
EAEckart Altenmüller
Eckart Altenmüller