Abstract

The dual-action simulation hypothesis proposes that both an observed and an imagined action can be represented simultaneously in the observer's brain. These two sensorimotor streams would either merge or compete depending on their relative suitability for action planning. To test this hypothesis, three forms of combined action observation and motor imagery (AO + MI) instructions were used in this repeated-measures experiment. Participants observed index finger abduction-adduction movements while imagining the same action (congruent AO + MI), little finger abduction-adduction (coordinative AO + MI), or a static hand (conflicting AO + MI). Single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was applied to the left primary motor cortex. The amplitude of motor evoked potential responses were recorded from both the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) and abductor digiti minimi (ADM) muscles of the right-hand while eye movements were tracked. When controlling for the influence of relevant eye movements, corticospinal excitability was facilitated relative to control conditions in the concurrently observed and imagined muscles for both congruent and coordinative AO + MI conditions. Eye-movement metrics and social validation data from post–experiment interviews provided insight into the attentional and cognitive mechanisms underlying these effects. The findings provide empirical support for the dual-action simulation hypothesis, indicating for the first time that it is possible to co-represent observed and imagined actions simultaneously.

Highlights

  • Action observation (AO) refers to the deliberate and structured observation of human movement (Neuman & Gray, 2013), whereas motor imagery (MI) involves the mental rehearsal of human movement, typically without accompanying body movement (Guillot &Collet, 2008)

  • Pairwise comparisons (Figure 4) showed that MEP amplitudes were larger in the AO+MICONG condition compared to the BLNH (p = .003), BLH (p < .001), and

  • AO+MICOOR condition compared to the BLH (p = .13) and AO+MICONF conditions (p = .11)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

It is well-established that improvements in motor function, across rehabilitation and sporting contexts, can be obtained following both AO and MI interventions Simulation theory, these two different forms of motor simulation are associated with activity in regions of the motor system that overlap, in part, with those involved in motor execution. This theory has been supported by neurophysiological research using a variety of techniques. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) research has shown that several brain areas involved in motor planning and execution (e.g., supplementary motor area, premotor cortex, superior parietal lobe and the intraparietal sulcus) are active during AO and MI (see Hardwick, Caspers, Eickhoff, & Swinnen, 2018 for a recent meta-analysis).

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.