Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-05-2015 | Review

A goal-based mechanism for delayed motor intention: considerations from motor skills, tool use and action memory

Auteurs: Arnaud Badets, François Osiurak

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 3/2015

Abstract

Thinking about our behaviors for a future recall like playing a piano sonata during the next weekend (i.e., delayed motor intention) should engage at some level sensorimotor-based representations. Theoretically, such representations can be stored through both an action- and a goal-based mechanism. An action-based mechanism is related to the specific motor sequence of fingers like the key presses on the piano, and a goal-based mechanism is related to the musical tones generated by the key presses. From these considerations, the present article tries to explore whether the cognitive nature of delayed motor intention is more based on an action or goal mechanism. We reviewed empirical evidence and theoretical accounts of different domains such as motor skills, tool use, and action memory supporting the idea that such delayed motor intentions are rather represented through a goal-based mechanism. The specific role of this goal-based mechanism is to envision the future in an implementation-neutral mode to flexibly and efficiently retrieve an adapted action to environmental constraints. This goal-based account offers an interesting alternative to reshape the classical models about the representations of delayed motor intention. We also discuss how this account can be applied to practical activities in daily life situations.

volgende artikel A French description of German psychology laboratories in 1893 by Victor Henri, a collaborator of Binet

By the action versus expected effect distinction, we mean that it is likely to envisage these DMI as being preferentially guided by what an individual has to perform (and which indirectly modify the environment) versus what an individual expects that his action will change in the environment (and which indirectly guide what he has to perform). This distinction will be discussed in more detail below.

These results might appear inconsistent with the results presented above with regard to a low KR frequency during a physical practice procedure. In fact, this previous study showed that when people form a DMI, the enhancement of the external information by reducing KR leads them to increase learning in retention test, suggesting that when we form an intention, this intention needs external goal information, and this need can be afforded through physical practice if a low KR frequency is scheduled. Here, participants of the PRA +I condition did not focus on external goal information but on action itself because of a high KR of results (100 %).

Adams, J. A. (1971). A closed-loop theory of motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 3, 111–150.PubMed

Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Bäckman, L., & Nilsson, L. G. (1984). Aging effects in free recall: an exception to the rule. Human Learning, 3, 53–69.

Badets, A. (2013). Semantic sides of three-dimensional space representation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 543.PubMed

Badets, A., Albinet, C. T., & Blandin, Y. (2012). Sensory-based mechanism for delayed motor intention. Acta Psychologica, 141, 205–213.PubMed

Badets, A., & Blandin, Y. (2010). Feedback schedules for motor-skill learning: the similarities and differences between physical and observational practice. Journal of Motor Behavior, 42, 257–268.PubMed

Badets, A., & Blandin, Y. (2012). Feedback and intention during motor-skill learning: a connection with prospective memory. Psychological Research, 76, 601–610.PubMed

Badets, A., Blandin, Y., Bouquet, C., & Shea, C. H. (2006a). The intention superiority effect in motor-skill performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 491–505.PubMed

Badets, A., Blandin, Y., & Shea, C. H. (2006b). Intention in motor learning through observation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 377–386.PubMed

Badets, A., & Pesenti, M. (2011). Finger–number interaction: an ideomotor account. Experimental Psychology, 58, 287–292.PubMed

Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645.PubMed

Binkofski, F., & Buxbaum, L. J. (2013). Two action systems in the human brain. Brain and Language 127, 222–229.

Bisiacchi, P. S., Schiff, S., Ciccola, A., & Kliegel, M. (2009). The role of dual-task and task-switch in prospective memory: behavioural data and neural correlates. Neuropsychologia, 47, 1362–1373.PubMed

Bjork, R. A. (1988). Retrieval practice and the maintenance of knowledge. In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, & R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory (pp. 396–401). London: Wiley.

Brandimonte, M. A., & Passolunghi, M. C. (1994). The effect of cue familiarity, cue-distinctiveness, and retention interval on prospective remembering. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 565–587.PubMed

Brooks, B. M., & Gardiner, J. M. (1994). Age differences in memory for prospective compared with retrospective subject-performed tasks. Memory and Cognition, 22, 27–33.PubMed

Buxbaum, L. J. (2001). Ideomotor Apraxia: a call to action. Neurocase, 7, 445–448.PubMed

Buxbaum, L. J., & Kalénine, S. (2010). Action knowledge, visuomotor activation, and embodiment in the two action systems. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1191, 201–218.PubMedCentralPubMed

Carey, L. M., Abbott, D., Egan, G., & Donnan, G. (2008). Reproducible activation in BA2, 1 and 3b associated with texture discrimination in healthy volunteers over time. Neuroimage, 39, 40–51.PubMed

Chasteen, A. L., Park, D. C., & Schwarz, N. (2001). Implementation intentions and facilitation of prospective memory. Psychological Science, 12, 457–461.PubMed

Cohen, R. L. (1989). Memory for action events: the power of enactment. Educational Psychological Review, 1, 57–80.

Cohen, D. A., Pascual-Leone, A., Press, D. Z., & Robertson, E. M. (2005). Off-line learning of motor skill memory: a double-dissociation of goal and movement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 18237–18241.PubMedCentralPubMed

Cooper, R. P., & Shallice, T. (2000). Contention scheduling and the control of routine activities. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 17, 297–338.PubMed

Cooper, R. P., & Shallice, T. (2006). Hierarchical schemas and goals in the control of sequential behavior. Psychological Review, 113, 887–916.PubMed

De Renzi, E. (1989). Apraxia. In F. Boller & J. Grafman (Eds.), Handbook of neuropsychology (pp. 245–263). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.

Dismukes, R. K. (2006). Concurrent task management and prospective memory: pilot error as a model for the vulnerability of experts, In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 50th Annual Meeting (pp. 903–114). San Francisco: HFES.

Dismukes, R. K. (2008). Prospective memory in aviation and everyday settings. In M. Kliegel, M. A. McDaniel, & G. O. Einstein (Eds.), Prospective memory: Cognitive, neuroscience, developmental, and applied perspectives (pp. 411–431). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Dismukes, R. K., Young, G., & Sumwalt, S. (1998). Cockpit interruptions and distractions: effective management requires a careful balancing act. ASRS Directline, 10, 3.

Einstein, G. O., & McDaniel, M. A. (1990). Normal aging and prospective memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 717–726.PubMed

Einstein, G. O., & McDaniel, M. A. (2005). Prospective memory: multiple retrieval processes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 286–290.

Ellis, J. (1996). Prospective memory or the realization of the delayed intentions: a conceptual framework for research. In M. Brandimonte, G. O. Einstein, & M. A. McDaniel (Eds.), Prospective memory: theory and applications (pp. 1–22). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ellis, J., Kvavilashvili, L., & Milne, A. (1999). Experimental tests of prospective remembering: the influence of cue-event frequency on performance. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 9–23.PubMed

Elsner, B., & Hommel, B. (2001). Effect anticipation and action control. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 27, 229–240.PubMed

Engelkamp, J. (1997). Memory for to-be-performed tasks versus memory for performed tasks. Memory and Cognition, 25, 117–124.PubMed

Engelkamp, J. (1998). Memory for actions. Hove: Psychology Press.

Engelkamp, J. (2001). Action memory: a system-oriented approach. In H. D. Zimmer, R. L. Cohen, M. J. Guynn, J. Engelkamp, R. Kormi-Nouri, & M. A. Foley (Eds.), Memory for action: a distinct form of episodic memory? (pp. 49–96). New York: Oxford University Press.

Eschen, A., Freeman, J., Dietrich, T., Martin, M., Ellis, J., Martin, E., et al. (2007). Motor brain regions are involved in the encoding of delayed intentions: a fMRI study. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 64, 259–268.PubMed

Fagioli, S., Ferlazzo, F., & Hommel, B. (2007). Controlling attention through action: observing actions primes action-related stimulus dimensions. Neuropsychologia, 45, 3351–3355.PubMed

Flach, R., Press, C., Badets, A., & Heyes, C. (2010). Shaking hands: priming by social action effects. British Journal of Psychology, 101, 739–749.PubMed

Freeman, J. E., & Ellis, J. A. (2003). The representation of delayed intentions: a prospective subject-performed task? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 976–992.PubMed

Goldenberg, G. (2013). Apraxia: the cognitive side of motor control. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Goldenberg, G., & Hagmann, S. (1998). Tool use and mechanical problem solving in apraxia. Neuropsychologia, 36, 581–589.PubMed

Goldenberg, G., Hartmann-Schmid, K., Sürer, F., Daumüller, M., & Hermsdörfer, J. (2007). The impact of dysexecutive syndrome on use of tools and technical devices. Cortex, 43, 424–435.PubMed

Goldenberg, G., & Spatt, J. (2009). The neural basis of tool use. Brain, 132, 1645–1655.PubMed

Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493–503.

Gollwitzer, P. M., & Brandstätter, V. (1997). Implementation intentions and effective goal pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 186–199.

Goschke, T., & Kuhl, J. (1993). Representation of intentions—persisting activation in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1211–1226.

Goschke, T., & Kuhl, J. (1996). Remembering what to do: Explicit and implicit memory for intentions. In M. Brandimonte, G. O. Einstein, & M. McDaniel (Eds.), Prospective memory: theory and applications (pp. 53–92). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Greenwald, A. G. (1970). Sensory feedback mechanisms in performance control: with special reference to the ideo-motor mechanism. Psychological Review, 77, 73–99.PubMed

Greenwald, A. G. (1972). On doing two things at once: time sharing as a function of ideomotor compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 94, 52–57.PubMed

Guadagnoli, M. A., & Lee, T. D. (2004). Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 36, 212–224.PubMed

Guynn, M. J. (2008). Theory of monitoring in prospective memory: Instantiating a retrieval mode and periodic target checking. In M. Kliegel, M. A. McDaniel, & G. O. Einstein (Eds.), Prospective memory: cognitive, neuroscience, developmental, and applied perspectives (pp. 53–76). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Haggard, P. (2005). Conscious intention and motor cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 290–295.PubMed

Hartmann, K., Goldenberg, G., Daumüller, M., & Hermsdörfer, J. (2005). It takes the whole brain to make a cup of coffee: the neuropsychology of naturalistic actions involving technical devices. Neuropsychologia, 43, 625–627.PubMed

Herwig, A., Prinz, W., & Waszak, F. (2007). Two modes of sensorimotor integration in intention-based and stimulus-based actions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 1540–1554.PubMed

Holbrook, J. B., Dismukes, R. K., & Nowinski, J. L. (2005). Identifying sources of variance in everyday prospective memory performance. Presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, Wellington, New Zealand.

Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): a framework for perception and action planning. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 24, 849–878.

Hornstein, S. L., & Mulligan, N. W. (2001). Memory of action events: the role of objects in memory of self- and other-performed tasks. The American journal of psychology, 114, 199–217.PubMed

Humphreys, G. W., & Forde, E. M. E. (1998). Disordered action schema and action disorganisation syndrome. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 15, 771–811.

Ivry, R. B. (1996). The representation of temporal information in perception and motor control. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 6, 851–857.PubMed

Jahn, P., & Engelkamp, J. (2003). Design-effects in prospective and retrospective memory for actions. Experimental Psychology, 50, 4–15.PubMed

James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology (Vol. 2). New York: Dover Publications.

Jarry, C., Osiurak, F., Delafuys, D., Chauviré, V., Etcharry-Bouyx, F., & Le Gall, D. (2013). Apraxia of tool use: more evidence for the technical reasoning hypothesis. Cortex, 49, 2322–2333.PubMed

Jeannerod, M. (1999). The 25th Bartlett Lecture. To act or not to act: perspectives on the representation of actions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52, 1–29.PubMed

Keele, S. W. (1968). Movement control in skilled motor performance. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 387–403.

Kliegel, M., McDaniel, M. A., & Einstein, G. O. (2008). Prospective memory: cognitive, neuroscience, developmental, and applied perspectives. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Koch, I., & Kunde, W. (2002). Verbal response–effect compatibility. Memory and Cognition, 30, 1297–1303.PubMed

Koriat, A., Ben-Zur, H., & Nussbaum, A. (1990). Encoding information for future action: memory for to-beperformed tasks versus memory for to-be-recalled tasks. Memory and Cognition, 18, 568–578.PubMed

Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus–response compatibility—a model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253–270.PubMed

Krieghoff, V., Waszak, F., Prinz, W., & Brass, M. (2011). Neural and behavioral correlates of intentional actions. Neuropsychologia, 49, 767–776.PubMed

Kunde, W., Elsner, K., & Kiesel, A. (2007). No anticipation-no action: the role of anticipation in action and perception. Cognitive Processing, 8, 71–78.PubMed

Kunde, W., Koch, I., & Hoffmann, J. (2004). Anticipated action effects affect the selection, initiation, and execution of actions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 87–106.PubMed

Lewin, K. (1926). Vorsatz, Wille und Bedurfnis (Resolution, will, and need). Psychologische Forschung, 7, 330–385.

Mäntylä, T. (1993). Priming effects in prospective memory. Memory, 1, 203–218.PubMed

Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., & Bink, M. L. (1998). Activation of completed, uncompleted, and partially completed intentions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 350–361.

Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., & Bryan, E. S. (1999). The activation of unrelated and cancelled intentions. Memory and Cognition, 27, 320–327.PubMed

Massen, C. (2013). Cognitive representations of tool-use interactions. New Ideas in Psychology, 31, 239–246.

Massen, C., & Prinz, W. (2007a). Programming tool-use actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 692–704.PubMed

Massen, C., & Prinz, W. (2007b). Activation of actions rules in action observation. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 1118–1130.PubMed

Massen, C., & Prinz, W. (2009). Movements, actions and tool-use actions: an ideomotor approach to imitation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, 364, 2349–2358.PubMedCentralPubMed

Mechsner, F., Kerzel, D., Knoblich, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). Perceptual basis of bimanual coordination. Nature, 414, 69–73.PubMed

Melcher, T., Weidema, M., Eenshuistra, R. M., Hommel, B., & Gruber, O. (2008). The neural substrate of the ideomotor principle: an event-related fMRI analysis. NeuroImage, 39, 1274–1288.PubMed

Norman, D. A. (1981). Categorization of action slips. Psychological Review, 88, 1–15.

Norman, D. A., & Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to action: willed and automatic control of behaviour. In R. J. Davidson, G. E. Schwartz, & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self-regulation: advances in research and theory (Vol. 4, pp 1–18). New York: Plenum Press.

Osiurak, F. (2014). What neuropsychology tells us about human tool use? The four constraints theory (4CT): mechanics, space, time and effort. Neuropsychology Review, 24, 88–115.PubMed

Osiurak, F., & Badets, A. (2014). Pliers, not fingers: tool-action effect in a motor intention paradigm. Cognition, 130, 66–73.PubMed

Osiurak, F., Jarry, C., Allain, P., Aubin, G., Etcharry-Bouyx, F., Richard, I., et al. (2009). Unusual use of objects after unilateral brain damage. The technical reasoning model. Cortex, 45, 769–783.PubMed

Osiurak, F., Jarry, C., & Le Gall, D. (2010). Grasping the affordances, understanding the reasoning. Toward a dialectical theory of human tool use. Psychological Review, 117, 517–540.PubMed

Osiurak, F., Jarry, C., & Le Gall, D. (2011). Re-examining the gesture engram hypothesis. New perspectives on apraxia of tool use. Neuropsychologia, 49, 299–312.PubMed

Osiurak, F., Jarry, C., Lesourd, M., Baumard, J., & Le Gall, D. (2013). Mechanical problem-solving in left brain-damaged patients. Neuropsychologia, 51, 1964–1972.PubMed

Ostry, D. J., Darainy, M., Mattar, A. A., Wong, J., & Gribble, P. L. (2010). Somatosensory plasticity and motor learning. Journal of Neuroscience, 30, 5384–5393.PubMedCentralPubMed

Palmer, C., & Meyer, R. K. (2000). Conceptual and motor learning in music performance. Psychological Science, 11, 63–68.PubMed

Palmer, C., & van de Sande, C. (1993). Units knowledge in music performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 457–470.PubMed

Papies, E. K., Aarts, H., & de Vries, N. K. (2009). Planning is for doing: implementation intentions go beyond the mere creation of goal-directed associations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1148–1151.

Pereira, A., Ellis, J., & Freeman, J. (2012). Is prospective memory enhanced by cue-action semantic relatedness and enactment at encoding? Consciousness and Cognition, 21, 1257–1266.PubMed

Pezzulo, G., Barsalou, L. W., Cangelosi, A., Fischer, M. H., McRae, K., & Spivey, M. J. (2013). Computational grounded cognition: a new alliance between grounded cognition and computational modeling. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 612.PubMedCentralPubMed

Pfister, R., Janczyk, M., Gressmann, M., Fournier, L. R., & Kunde, W. (2014). Good vibrations? Vibrotactile self-stimulation reveals anticipation of body-related action effects in motor control. Experimental Brain Research, 232, 847–854.PubMed

Reason, J. T. (1979). Actions not as planned: the price of automatization. In G. Underwood & R. Stevens (Eds.), Aspects of consciousness (pp. 67–89). London: Academic Press.

Reason, J. (1990). Human Error. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rothi, L. J. G., Ochipa, C., & Heilman, K. M. (1991). A cognitive neuropsychological model of limb praxis. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 8, 443–458.

Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor-skill learning. Psychological Review, 82, 225–260.

Schmidt, R. A. (1991). Frequent augmented feedback can degrade learning: Evidence and interpretations. In J. Requin & G. E. Stelmach (Eds.), Tutorials in motor neuroscience (pp. 59–75). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2011). Motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis (5th ed.). Champaign: Human Kinetics Publishers.

Schütz-Bosbach, S., & Prinz, W. (2007a). Prospective coding in event representation. Cognitive Processing, 8, 93–102.PubMed

Schütz-Bosbach, S., & Prinz, W. (2007b). Perceptual resonance: action-induced modulation of perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 349–355.PubMed

Schwartz, M. F. (1995). Re-examining the role of executive functions in routine action production. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 769, 321–335.

Searle, J. R. (1980). The intentionality of intention and Action. Cognitive Science, 4, 47–70.

Shea, C. H., Wright, D. L., Wulf, G., & Whitacre, C. (2000). Physical and observational practice afford unique learning opportunities. Journal of Motor Behavior, 32, 27–36.PubMed

Shea, C. H., & Wulf, G. (2005). Schema theory: a critical appraisal and reevaluation. Journal of Motor Behavior, 37, 85–101.PubMed

Sherwood, D. E., & Lee, T. D. (2003). Schema theory: critical review and implications for the role of cognition in a new theory of motor learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74, 376–382.PubMed

Shin, Y. K., & Proctor, R. W. (2012). Testing boundary conditions of the ideomotor hypothesis using a delayed response task. Acta Psychologica, 141, 360–372.PubMed

Steffens, M. C., Buchner, A., Wender, K. F., & Decker, C. (2007). Limits on the role of retrieval cues in memory for actions: enactment effects in the absence of object cues in the environment. Memory and Cognition, 35, 1841–1853.PubMed

Stöcker, C., & Hoffmann, J. (2004). The ideomotor principle and motor sequence acquisition: tone effects facilitate movement chunking. Psychological Research, 68, 126–137.PubMed

Suddendorf, T., & Corballis, M. C. (2007). The evolution of foresight: what is mental time travel, and is it unique to humans? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30, 299–351.PubMed

Summers, J. J., & Anson, J. G. (2009). Current status of the motor program: revisited. Human Movement Science, 28, 566–577.PubMed

Szpunar, K. K., Watson, J. M., & McDermott, K. B. (2007). Neural substrates of envisioning the future. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA, 104, 642–647.

Thomas, R., Sink, J., & Haggard, P. (2013). Sensory effects of action observation: evidence for perceptual enhancement driven by sensory rather than motor simulation. Experimental Psychology, 60, 335–346.PubMed

Treisman, M., Faulkner, A., & Naish, P. L. (1992). On the relation between time perception and the timing of motor action: evidence for a temporal oscillator controlling the timing of movement. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45, 235–263.PubMed

Vidoni, E. D., Acerra, N. E., Dao, E., Meehan, S. K., & Boyd, L. A. (2010). Role of the primary somatosensory cortex in motor learning: an rTMS study. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 93, 532–539.PubMed

Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 625–636.PubMed

Wulf, G., & Shea, C. H. (2004). Understanding the role of augmented feedback: the good, the bad, and the ugly. In A. M. Williams, N. J. Hodges, M. A. Scott, & M. L. J. Court (Eds.), Skill Acquisition in Sport: research, theory, and practice (pp. 121–144). London: Routledge.

Titel: A goal-based mechanism for delayed motor intention: considerations from motor skills, tool use and action memory
Auteurs: Arnaud Badets
François Osiurak
Publicatiedatum: 01-05-2015
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 3/2015
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0581-5

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2015

Beyond trial types

Aging increases distraction by auditory oddballs in visual, but not auditory tasks

Competitor Rule Priming: Evidence for priming of task rules in task switching

Motor imagery practice may compensate for the slowdown of sensorimotor processes induced by short-term upper-limb immobilization

Selective attention and recognition: effects of congruency on episodic learning

No differences in dual-task costs between forced- and free-choice tasks