Upper limb muscle reflexes in real and virtual environments: Insights into sensorimotor adaptations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The mechanisms influencing neuromuscular adaptations in the upper limb within dynamic environments remain understudied, especially when exposed to altered visual and emotional conditions such as those simulated in virtual reality (VR). Here we utilize VR to manipulate visual feedback, inducing motion sickness and modulating sympathetic arousal, while assessing adaptations in sensorimotor integration in the upper extremity using electrically evoked and muscle stretch reflexes. METHODS: Eighteen healthy young adults experienced four experimental conditions while sustaining submaximal activation of their flexor carpi radialis (FCR) muscle by isometrically supporting a weighted load: baseline real-world (Pre-VR), stationary VR (VR-BL), dynamic VR with motion perception via a virtual rollercoaster ride (VR-C), and post-VR following re-entry to the real environment (Post-VR). Muscle activity was monitored via electromyography (EMG), while reflex activity was assessed using electrical (H-reflexes) and mechanically induced (noisy tendon vibration; NTV) reflexes in the FCR. Additionally, electrodermal activity (EDA) and psychosocial indicators of motion sickness (subjective questionnaires) were measured throughout. RESULTS: H-reflex amplitude was suppressed during VR-C, which persisted into Post-VR; whereas NTV-reflexes were unaffected across conditions. Sympathetic arousal (e.g., EDA) and motion sickness symptoms increased significantly during VR-C compared to Pre-VR, but rapidly returned to baseline Post-VR. EMG within the target muscle (FCR) as well as in the brachioradialis was maintained across conditions, though increased activation was observed in the biceps brachii beginning at the onset of VR immersion (VR-BL). DISCUSSION: These findings suggest suppression of spinal excitability (H-reflex) when the perception of motion (VR-C) was added to a stationary VR experience. Meanwhile, muscle spindle sensitivity (NTV-reflex) remained consistent, highlighting potential fusimotor adaptations to maintain sensorimotor function under altered visual and emotional states. Persistent H-reflex suppression post-VR indicates lingering neuromuscular effects of immersive VR, underscoring the need for further exploration of VR's implications for rehabilitation and virtual training environments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".