Combining motor imagery with action observation training does not lead to a greater autonomic nervous system response than motor imagery alone during simple and functional movements: a randomized controlled trial.

Ferran Cuenca-Martínez,Alba Paris-Alemany,Roy La Touche,Luis Suso-Martí,Mónica Grande-Alonso

doi:10.7717/peerj.5142

Abstract

Both motor imagery (MI) and action observation (AO) trigger the activation of the neurocognitive mechanisms that underlie the planning and execution of voluntary movements in a manner that resembles how the action is performed in a real way. The main objective of the present study was to compare the autonomic nervous system (ANS) response in an isolated MI group compared to a combined MI + AO group. The mental tasks were based on two simple movements that are recorded in the revised movement imagery questionnaire in third-person perspective. The secondary objective of the study was to test if there was any relationship between the ANS variables and the ability to generate mental motor imagery, the mental chronometry and the level of physical activity. The main outcomes that were measured were heart rate, respiratory rate and electrodermal activity. A Biopac MP150 system, a measurement device of autonomic changes, was used for the quantification and evaluation of autonomic variables. Forty five asymptomatic subjects were selected and randomized in three groups: isolated MI, MI + AO and control group (CG). In regards to the activation of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS), no differences were observed between MI and MI + AO groups (p > .05), although some differences were found between both groups when compared to the CG (p < .05). Additionally, even though no associations were reported between the ANS variables and the ability to generate mental motor imagery, moderate-strong positive associations were found in mental chronometry and the level of physical activity. Our results suggest that MI and MI + AO, lead to an activation of the SNS, although there are no significant differences between the two groups. Based on results obtained, we suggest that tasks of low complexity, providing a visual input through the AO does not facilitates their subsequent motor imagination. A higher level of physical activity as well as a longer time to perform mental task, seem to be associated with a greater increase in the ANS response.

Highlights

Motor imagery (MI) is defined as a dynamic mental process that involves the representation of an action, in an internal way, without its actual motor execution (Decety, 1996)
A total of 45 asymptomatic subjects were included in the present study and were randomly assigned to three balanced groups consisting of 15 subjects per group
The analysis revealed statistically significant intragroup differences in both the MI group and the MI + action observation (AO) group in every comparison with a large effect size (p < .05, d > 0.8), which was slightly higher in the combined group, and there were no significant differences in the control group (CG) (p > .05) (Table 3)

Summary

Introduction

Motor imagery (MI) is defined as a dynamic mental process that involves the representation of an action, in an internal way, without its actual motor execution (Decety, 1996). The action observation (AO) evokes an internal, real-time motor simulation of the movements that the observer perceives visually (Rizzolatti & Sinigaglia, 2010; Buccino, 2014) Both mental processes trigger the activation of the neurocognitive mechanisms that underlie the planning and execution of voluntary movements in a manner that resembles how the action is performed in a real manner (Stephan et al, 1995; Luft et al, 1998; Lotze et al, 1999; Wright, Williams & Holmes, 2014). Whereas some studies did not report primary motor cortex activations during MI, others found low involvement or relevant activation, showing some discrepancies (Guillot & Collet, 2005a; Guillot et al, 2012)

Objectives

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion