工作限制對人體多肢段運動學習的影響

研 究 生：戴遠成
指導教授：劉有德
摘 要
當進行動作協調研究探討時，所面臨的主要挑戰就是尋找出複雜高維度的人體結構是如何被壓縮而形成低維度的協調動作型態。現今，運動行為的研究大都以 N. A. Bernstein (1967) 所提出自由度的問題當成其探討的出發點。本研究主要目的在於檢視多肢段的動作在運動學習過程中，機械自由度與動態自由度的組織變化情形。本研究以八位大學女生作為實驗參加者且先前沒有任何與本研究動作經驗。在練習的時段要求參加者雙手握持橫木槓站立於動態平衡台，並且盡量維持水平的姿勢。每天二十次試作練習，每次試作三十秒，共計六天 (一百二十次試作) 的練習。以 Kinema Tracer 3D 動作分析系統 (Kissei Comtec)，藉由四部高速攝影機以 60Hz 取樣速度，擷取全身肢段十七個解剖標誌點的三維座標運動學參數。採用主成分分析來檢視動作系統的維度變化。所得資料以重複量數單因子變異數分析，t 檢定及交叉相關等統計進行比較其結果如下：.
從本研究結果中缺乏充分的證據可以支持Bernstein (1967) 所提及的凍結與釋放自由度假說。人體全身多肢段中眾多機械自由度會以自我組織的方式，縮減成少數幾個動態自由度來獲得解決。運動學習過程中，練習不但會改變全身多肢段可控制的維度的數量，而且還會導致其相關變數解釋量的轉變。最後，經由本研究發現顯示，複雜的運動行為其機械自由度的招募與壓縮會深受工作、個體與環境多重限制的交互作用影響，同樣地動態自由度的時間空間組織也會因這些限制而改變。從動力系統的觀點，生物體複雜的型態與動力或許不需要複雜控制結構。協調型態更是取決於不同限制與透過探索策略，尋找出其最佳知覺工作場所的動力。
關鍵字︰工作限制，主成分分析，動力系統

The influence of learning on the body multisegmental movement under task constraints
Graduate Student：Yuan-Cheng Dai
Advisor：Yeou-Teh Liu
Abstract

A primary challege in the investigation of movement coordination is discovering how high-dimension body structures are compressed into low-dimensional movement coodination. N. A. Bernstein's formulation of the problems of degrees of freedom is often taken as the starting point.The main purpose of this study was to examine the process of learning multisegmental movement on the changes in the organization of mechanical and dynamical degrees of freedom. Eight female undergraduates were served as the participants of this investigation. None of participants had priod experience with the task.The participants were performed while holding the pole and standing to keep the platform in horizontal position for as long as possible .Each participant completed 6 days of practice; each practice day included 20 trials, each 30s in length. The kinematics of the movements was measured using a four-camera, Kinema Tracer 3D motion analysis system (Kissei Comtec) with a 17 anatomical landmark whole body set-up sampled at 60 Hz. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used to examine dimensional changes of movement system. The data were analyzed by repeated measure one-way ANOVA, t-test and cross correlation function at .05 significant level. The results are as follows:
The results provide limited empirical evidence to support Bernstein’s (1967) freezing-releasing hypothesis .The multiple degrees of freedom of whole body segments are resolved into a few control DF. The multiple segments movement revealed that the number of controlled dimensions not only change across practice but also shifted their relative contribution. Finally, the present findings showed that the interaction of task, organismic, and evironmental constraints strongly influence the recruitment and suppesion of mechanical degrees of freedom also affects their spatiotemporal organization within the dynamical dgrees of freedom.Form dynamical systems perspective, complex patterns and dynamics might not require complex control structures. In addition, the coorination pattern depends on the different constraints, and search stratgies used to explore the dynamics of perceptual workplace.

Key Words: task constraints, principal component analysis, dynamical systems

中文部份：
廖庭儀、劉有德，(2003)。以學習曲線描述協調型態的轉移。台東大學體育學報，創刊號，73-87。
劉有德 (2004)。動力系統與運動行為。成大體育，38(4)，1-7。
陳秀惠 (2005)。量化全身性協調之工具─主成份分析。體育學報，38 (4)，39-51。
英文部份：
Adams, J.A. (1971) A closed-loop theory of motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 3, 111-150.
Amblard, B., Assaiante, C., Lehel, H., & Marchland, A.R. (1994). A statistical approach to sensorimotor strategies: conjugate cross correlations. Journal of Motor Behavior, 26, 103-112.
Bernstein, N. (1967). The coordination and regulation of movements. Oxford. England: Pergamon Press.
Barela, J.A., Jeka, J.J.,& Clark, J.E. (1999). The use of somatosensory information during the acquisition of upright stance. Infant Behavior & Development, 22, 87-102.
Balasubramaniam, R., & Turvey, M. T. (2004). Coordination modes in mutisegmental dynamics of hula hoping. Biological Cybernetics, 90, 176-190.
Chen, H.H., Liu, Y.T., Mayer-Kress, G., & Newell, K. M. (2005). Learning the pedalo locomotion task. Journal of Motor Behavior, 37, 247-256.
Callou, N., Nourrit, D., Deshamps, T., Lauriot, B.,& Delignieres. (2002). Overcoming spontaneous patterns of coordination during the acquisition of complex balancing task. Canadian Journal of Psychology. 56,283-293.
Davids, K., Glazier, P., Araujo, D., & Bartlett, R. (2003). Movement system as dynamical systems (the functional role of variability and its implication for sport medicine). Sport Medicine, 33(4), 245-260.
Daffertshofer, A., Lamoth, C. J. C., Meijer, O. G., & Beek, P. J. (2004). PCA in studying coordination and variability: a tutorial. Clinical Biomechanics, 19, 415-428.
Dai, Y.C., Yen, Y.T., & Liu, Y.T. (2006) Practice sessions and task constraints on the postural control of dynamical balance. NASPSPA Conference in Denver, Colorado, USA.
Ericsson, K. (2001) The path to expert golf performance: Insights from the masters on how to improve by deliberate practice. In P. Thomas (Ed.), Optimizing performance in golf (pp.1-58). Brisbane, Australia: Australian Academic Press.
Fitts, P.M., & Posner, M. I. (1967). Human performance. Belmoont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Gibson, J. J. (1961). Ecological Optics. Vision Research, 1,253-262.
Geert, P. V., & Dijk, M, V. (2002). Focus on variability: New tools to study intra-individual variability in development data. Infant Behavior & Development. 25, 340-347.
Haken, H. (1996). Principles of brain functioning. Berlin: Springer.
Higuchi, T., Imanaka, K., & Hatayama, T. (2002).Freezing degrees of freedom under stress: Kinematic evidence of constrained movement strategies. Human Movement Science, 21,831-846.
Hodges, N. J., Hayes, S., Horn, R. R., & Williams, A. M. (2005). Changes in coordination, control and outcome as a result of extended practice on a novel motor skill. Ergonomics, 48, 11-14.
Hollands, K. L., Wing, A.M., & Daffertshofer, A. (2004). Principal components in contemporary dance movements, San Diego, USA, Society for Neuroscience Conference, Publication: 28427.
Hong, S., & Newell, K.M. (2006).Change in organization of degrees of freedom with learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 38, 88-100.
Kugler, P. N., & Turvey, M. T. (1987). Information, natural law, and the self assembly of rhythmic movement. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associate.
Kay, B. A. (1988). The dimensionality of movement trajectories and the degree of freedom problem: A tutorial. Human Movement Science. 7, 343-364.
Kamm, K., Thelen, E., & Jensen, J.L. (1990). A dynamical systems approach to motor development. Physical Therapy, 70, 763-775.
Ko, Y. G., Challis, J. H., & Newell, K. M. (2001). Postural coordination patterns as a function of dynamics of the support surface. Human Movement Science, 20,737-764.
Kiemel,T., Oies, K.S., and Jeka, J.J.( 2002). Multisensory fusion and the stochastic structure of postural sway. Biological Cybernetics, 87. 262 - 277.
Lackner, J. R., Rabin, E., & DiZio, P. (2001). Stabilization of postural by precision touch of the index finger with rigid and flexible filaments. Experimental Brain Research, 139, 454-464.
Li, Z.M. (2006) Functional degrees of freedom. Motor Control, 10. (4), 301-310.
McDonald, P.V., Van Emmerik,R.E.A., & Newell, K. M. (1989). The effects of practice on limb kinematics in a throwing task. Journal of Motor Behavior, 21, 245-264.
Mitra, S., Amazeen, P. G., & Turvey, M. T. (1998). Intermediate motor learning as decreasing active (dynamical) degrees of freedom. Human Movement Science, 17, 17-65.
Mauerberg-deCastro, E. (2004) Developing an “Anchor”system to enhance postural control. Motor Control. 8, 339-358.
Newell, K.M. (1986). Constraints on the development of coordination. In M.G. Wade & H.T.A. Whiting (Eds.), Motor development in children: Aspects of coordination and control. Amsterdam: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Newell, K. M., & Van Emmerik, R. E. A. (1989). The acquisition of coordination: Preliminary analysis of learning to write. Human Movement Science, 8. 17-32.
Newell, K, M; Kugler, PN; Van Emmerik, R, E., & McDonald, P. V. (1989) Perspectives on the coordination of Movement. S.A Wallace (Editor).
Newell, K. M. (1991). Motor skill acquisition. Annual Review Psychology. 42, 213-237.
Newell, K. M., & Vaillancourt, D. E. (2001). Dimensional change in motor learning. Human Movement Science, 20, 695-715.
Newell, K.M., Broderick, M.P., Deutsch, K.M. & Slifkin, A.B. (2003). Task goals and change in dynamical degrees of freedom with motor learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perception and performance, Vol. 29, No.2, pp. 379-387.
Oullier, O., Bardy, B.G., Stoffregen, T.A., & Bootsma, R.J. (2004). Task specific stabilization of postural coordination during stance on a beam. Motor Control, 8, 174-187.
Riccio, G ., & Stoffregen.T.A. (1988). Affordances as constraints on the control of stance. Human Movement Science, 7,265-300.
Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological Review, 82, 225-260.
SumwayCook, A., & Horak, F.B. (1986). Assessing the influence of sensory interaction on balance. Physical Therapy, 66, 1548-1550.
Vereijken, B., van Emmerik, R. E. A., Whiting, H. T. A., & Newell, K. M. (1992). Free(z)ing degrees of freedom in skill acquisition. Journal of Motor Behavior, 24, 133-142.
Van Emmerik, R.E.A., Rosenstein, M. T., McDermott W. J., & Hamill, J. (2004) A nonlinear dynamics approach to human movement. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 20,396-420.
Valerro, Cuevas, F. J. (2005). An integrative approach to the biomechanical function and neuromuscular control of the fingers. Journal of Biomechanics, 38, 673-684.
Zatsiorsky, V.M. (1998). Kinematics of human motion. Human Kinetics, Champain,IL.