Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in:

04-04-2019 | Original Article

Motor imagery entails task-set inhibition

Auteurs: Juliane Scheil, Thomas Kleinsorge, Baptist Liefooghe

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 6/2020

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Motor imagery requires the covert execution of a movement without any overt motor output. Previous studies indicated that motor imagery results in the prolonged inhibition of motor commands. In the present study, we investigated whether motor imagery also leads to the inhibition of more abstract task representations. To do so, we investigated the effect of motor imagery on n − 2 repetition costs, which offer an index of the extent to which task representations are inhibited. Participants switched among three tasks and among two response modes: overt and covert responding (i.e., motor imagery). N – 2 repetition costs were present when the current trial required an overt response but absent when the current trial required a covert response. Furthermore, n − 2 repetition costs were more pronounced when trial n − 1 required a covert response rather than an overt response. This pattern of results suggests that motor imagery also leads to the inhibition of abstract task representations. We discuss our findings in view of current conceptualizations of motor imagery and argue that the inhibitory mechanism entailed by motor imagery targets more than motor commands alone. Finally, we also relate our findings to the mechanisms underlying the inhibition of task representations.
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Voetnoten
1
It should be noted that individual eye blink rates were measured before and after the experiment for explorative reasons. However, as the respective analyses yield no additional clear-cut information and the results pattern is not influenced by differences in eye blink rates, these results will not be reported further.
 
2
An analysis including the response mode in trial n, n – 1, and n – 2 was avoided due to less than 30 observations per cell that were left. However, as this analysis did not yield a four-way interaction of all factors, no information is lost by reporting two ANOVAs with three factors each.
 
3
Please note that the data pattern remains unchanged if errors and post-error trials are removed for overt responses. The F values even increase, leading to a significant three-way interaction, F (1, 29) = 4.63, p < 0.05, \(\eta_{p}^{2}\) = 0.14, MSe = 71,166: n – 2 repetition costs were present after covert trials, irrespective of the response mode in the current trial. After overt trials, n – 2 repetition costs were only visible for overt trials, while an n – 2 repetition benefit occurred for covert trials.
 
4
A combined analysis with the factors task sequence, Mode, lag1-Mode, and response transition revealed that the response transition factor did affect neither the interaction of task sequence and mode nor the interaction of Task Sequence and lag1-Mode (p > 0.82 and p > 0.21 for the respective three-way interactions).
 
Literatuur
go back to reference Burianová, H., Marstaller, L., Sowman, P., Tesan, G., Rich, A. N., Williams, M., … Johnson, B. W. (2013). Multimodal functional imaging of motor imagery using a novel paradigm. NeuroImage,71, 50–58.CrossRef Burianová, H., Marstaller, L., Sowman, P., Tesan, G., Rich, A. N., Williams, M., … Johnson, B. W. (2013). Multimodal functional imaging of motor imagery using a novel paradigm. NeuroImage,71, 50–58.CrossRef
go back to reference Decety, J. (1996). The neurophysiological basis of motor imagery. Behavioural Brain Research,77(1), 45–52.CrossRef Decety, J. (1996). The neurophysiological basis of motor imagery. Behavioural Brain Research,77(1), 45–52.CrossRef
go back to reference Dickstein, R., & Deutsch, J. E. (2007). Motor imagery in physical therapist practice. Physical Therapy,87(7), 942–953.CrossRef Dickstein, R., & Deutsch, J. E. (2007). Motor imagery in physical therapist practice. Physical Therapy,87(7), 942–953.CrossRef
go back to reference Dreher, J. C., & Berman, K. F. (2002). Fractionating the neural substrate of cognitive control processes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,99, 14595–14600.CrossRef Dreher, J. C., & Berman, K. F. (2002). Fractionating the neural substrate of cognitive control processes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,99, 14595–14600.CrossRef
go back to reference Gade, M., & Koch, I. (2005). Linking inhibition to activation in the control of task sequences. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,12, 530–534.CrossRef Gade, M., & Koch, I. (2005). Linking inhibition to activation in the control of task sequences. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,12, 530–534.CrossRef
go back to reference Grange, J. A., & Houghton, G. (2010). Heightened conflict in cue-target translation increases backward inhibition in set switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition,36, 1003–1009.CrossRef Grange, J. A., & Houghton, G. (2010). Heightened conflict in cue-target translation increases backward inhibition in set switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition,36, 1003–1009.CrossRef
go back to reference Grange, J. A., Juvina, I., & Houghton, G. (2013). On costs and benefits of n − 2 repetitions in task switching: Towards a behavioural marker of cognitive inhibition. Psychological Research,77, 211–222.CrossRef Grange, J. A., Juvina, I., & Houghton, G. (2013). On costs and benefits of n − 2 repetitions in task switching: Towards a behavioural marker of cognitive inhibition. Psychological Research,77, 211–222.CrossRef
go back to reference Guillot, A., Di Rienzo, F., MacIntyre, T., Moran, A., & Collet, C. (2012). Imagining is not doing but involves specific motor commands: A review of experimental data related to motor inhibition. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,6, 247.CrossRef Guillot, A., Di Rienzo, F., MacIntyre, T., Moran, A., & Collet, C. (2012). Imagining is not doing but involves specific motor commands: A review of experimental data related to motor inhibition. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,6, 247.CrossRef
go back to reference Haynes, W. I., & Haber, S. N. (2013). The organization of prefrontal-subthalamic inputs in primates provides an anatomical substrate for both functional specificity and integration: Implications for basal ganglia models and deep brain stimulation. Journal of Neuroscience,33(11), 4804–4814.CrossRef Haynes, W. I., & Haber, S. N. (2013). The organization of prefrontal-subthalamic inputs in primates provides an anatomical substrate for both functional specificity and integration: Implications for basal ganglia models and deep brain stimulation. Journal of Neuroscience,33(11), 4804–4814.CrossRef
go back to reference Hommel, B. (2005). How much attention does an event file need? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,31, 1067–1082.PubMed Hommel, B. (2005). How much attention does an event file need? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,31, 1067–1082.PubMed
go back to reference Houghton, G., Pritchard, R., & Grange, J. A. (2009). The role of cue–target translation in backward inhibition of attentional set. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition,35, 466–476.CrossRef Houghton, G., Pritchard, R., & Grange, J. A. (2009). The role of cue–target translation in backward inhibition of attentional set. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition,35, 466–476.CrossRef
go back to reference Hübner, R., & Druey, M. D. (2006). Response execution, selection, or activation: What is sufficient for response-related repetition effects under task shifting? Psychological Research,70, 245–261.CrossRef Hübner, R., & Druey, M. D. (2006). Response execution, selection, or activation: What is sufficient for response-related repetition effects under task shifting? Psychological Research,70, 245–261.CrossRef
go back to reference Hübner, R., & Druey, M. D. (2008). Response inhibition under task switching: Its strength depends on the amount of task-irrelevant response activation. Psychological Research,72, 515–527.CrossRef Hübner, R., & Druey, M. D. (2008). Response inhibition under task switching: Its strength depends on the amount of task-irrelevant response activation. Psychological Research,72, 515–527.CrossRef
go back to reference Jeannerod, M. (1994). The representing brain. Neural correlates of motor intention and imagery. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,17, 187–245.CrossRef Jeannerod, M. (1994). The representing brain. Neural correlates of motor intention and imagery. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,17, 187–245.CrossRef
go back to reference Jeannerod, M. (2001). Neural simulation of action: A unifying mechanism for motor control. NeuroImage,14, S103–S109.CrossRef Jeannerod, M. (2001). Neural simulation of action: A unifying mechanism for motor control. NeuroImage,14, S103–S109.CrossRef
go back to reference Jeannerod, M. (2006). Motor cognition: What actions tell the self (No. 42). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Jeannerod, M. (2006). Motor cognition: What actions tell the self (No. 42). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
go back to reference Jost, K., Hennecke, V., & Koch, I. (2017). Task dominance determines backward inhibition in task switching. Frontiers in Psychology,8, 755.CrossRef Jost, K., Hennecke, V., & Koch, I. (2017). Task dominance determines backward inhibition in task switching. Frontiers in Psychology,8, 755.CrossRef
go back to reference Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). Control and interference in task switching—A review. Psychological Bulletin,136, 849–874.CrossRef Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). Control and interference in task switching—A review. Psychological Bulletin,136, 849–874.CrossRef
go back to reference Kleinsorge, T. (1999). Response repetition benefits and costs. Acta Psychologica,103(3), 295–310.CrossRef Kleinsorge, T. (1999). Response repetition benefits and costs. Acta Psychologica,103(3), 295–310.CrossRef
go back to reference Koch, I., Gade, M., Schuch, S., & Philipp, A. M. (2010). The role of inhibition in task switching: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,17, 1–14.CrossRef Koch, I., Gade, M., Schuch, S., & Philipp, A. M. (2010). The role of inhibition in task switching: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,17, 1–14.CrossRef
go back to reference Koch, I., Poljac, E., Müller, H., & Kiesel, A. (2018). Cognitive structure, flexibility, and plasticity in human multitasking—An integrative review of dual-task and task-switching research. Psychological Bulletin,144, 557–583.CrossRef Koch, I., Poljac, E., Müller, H., & Kiesel, A. (2018). Cognitive structure, flexibility, and plasticity in human multitasking—An integrative review of dual-task and task-switching research. Psychological Bulletin,144, 557–583.CrossRef
go back to reference Kraeutner, S., Gionfriddo, A., Bardouille, T., & Boe, S. (2014). Motor imagery-based brain activity parallels that of motor execution: Evidence from magnetic source imaging of cortical oscillations. Brain Research,1588, 81–91.CrossRef Kraeutner, S., Gionfriddo, A., Bardouille, T., & Boe, S. (2014). Motor imagery-based brain activity parallels that of motor execution: Evidence from magnetic source imaging of cortical oscillations. Brain Research,1588, 81–91.CrossRef
go back to reference Mayr, U., & Keele, S. W. (2000). Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,129, 4–26.CrossRef Mayr, U., & Keele, S. W. (2000). Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,129, 4–26.CrossRef
go back to reference Nambu, A., Tokuno, H., Inase, M., & Takada, M. (1997). Corticosubthalamic input zones from forelimb representations of the dorsal and ventral divisions of the premotor cortex in the macaque monkey: Comparison with the input zones from the primary motor cortex and the supplementary motor area. Neuroscience Letters,239(1), 13–16.CrossRef Nambu, A., Tokuno, H., Inase, M., & Takada, M. (1997). Corticosubthalamic input zones from forelimb representations of the dorsal and ventral divisions of the premotor cortex in the macaque monkey: Comparison with the input zones from the primary motor cortex and the supplementary motor area. Neuroscience Letters,239(1), 13–16.CrossRef
go back to reference O’Shea, H., & Moran, A. (2017). Does motor simulation theory explain the cognitive mechanisms underlying motor imagery? A critical review. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,11, 72.CrossRef O’Shea, H., & Moran, A. (2017). Does motor simulation theory explain the cognitive mechanisms underlying motor imagery? A critical review. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,11, 72.CrossRef
go back to reference Philipp, A. M., Jolicoeur, P., Falkenstein, M., & Koch, I. (2007). Response selection and response execution in task switching: Evidence from a go-signal paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition,33, 1062–1075.CrossRef Philipp, A. M., Jolicoeur, P., Falkenstein, M., & Koch, I. (2007). Response selection and response execution in task switching: Evidence from a go-signal paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition,33, 1062–1075.CrossRef
go back to reference Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2006). Task inhibition and task repetition in task switching. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,18, 624–639.CrossRef Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2006). Task inhibition and task repetition in task switching. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,18, 624–639.CrossRef
go back to reference Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). The integration of task-set components into cognitive task representations. Psychologica Belgica,50, 383–411.CrossRef Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). The integration of task-set components into cognitive task representations. Psychologica Belgica,50, 383–411.CrossRef
go back to reference Ridderinkhof, K. R., van den Wildenberg, W. P., & Brass, M. (2014). “Don’t” versus “Won’t”: Principles, mechanisms, and intention in action inhibition. Neuropsychologia,65, 255–262.CrossRef Ridderinkhof, K. R., van den Wildenberg, W. P., & Brass, M. (2014). “Don’t” versus “Won’t”: Principles, mechanisms, and intention in action inhibition. Neuropsychologia,65, 255–262.CrossRef
go back to reference Rieger, M., Dahm, S. F., & Koch, I. (2017). Inhibition in motor imagery: A novel action mode switching paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,24(2), 459–466.CrossRef Rieger, M., Dahm, S. F., & Koch, I. (2017). Inhibition in motor imagery: A novel action mode switching paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,24(2), 459–466.CrossRef
go back to reference Scheil, J. (2016). Effects of absolute and relative practice on n − 2 repetition costs. Acta Psychologica,164, 65–69.CrossRef Scheil, J. (2016). Effects of absolute and relative practice on n − 2 repetition costs. Acta Psychologica,164, 65–69.CrossRef
go back to reference Scheil, J., & Kleinsorge, T. (2014). N − 2 repetition costs depend on preparation in trials n − 1 and n − 2. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition,40, 865–872.CrossRef Scheil, J., & Kleinsorge, T. (2014). N − 2 repetition costs depend on preparation in trials n − 1 and n − 2. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition,40, 865–872.CrossRef
go back to reference Scheil, J., & Liefooghe, B. (2018). Motor command inhibition and the representation of response mode during motor imagery. Acta Psychologica,186, 54–62.CrossRef Scheil, J., & Liefooghe, B. (2018). Motor command inhibition and the representation of response mode during motor imagery. Acta Psychologica,186, 54–62.CrossRef
go back to reference Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2003). The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,29, 92–105.PubMed Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2003). The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,29, 92–105.PubMed
go back to reference Schuster, C., Hilfiker, R., Amft, O., Scheidhauer, A., Andrews, B., Butler, J., … Ettlin, T. (2011). Best practice for motor imagery: A systematic literature review on motor imagery training elements in five different disciplines. BMC Medline,9, 75.CrossRef Schuster, C., Hilfiker, R., Amft, O., Scheidhauer, A., Andrews, B., Butler, J., … Ettlin, T. (2011). Best practice for motor imagery: A systematic literature review on motor imagery training elements in five different disciplines. BMC Medline,9, 75.CrossRef
go back to reference Steinhauser, M., Hübner, R., & Druey, M. (2009). Adaptive control of response preparedness in task switching. Neuropsychologia,47, 1826–1835.CrossRef Steinhauser, M., Hübner, R., & Druey, M. (2009). Adaptive control of response preparedness in task switching. Neuropsychologia,47, 1826–1835.CrossRef
go back to reference Stinear, C. (2010). Prediction of recovery of motor function after stroke. The Lancet Neurology,9(12), 1228–1232.CrossRef Stinear, C. (2010). Prediction of recovery of motor function after stroke. The Lancet Neurology,9(12), 1228–1232.CrossRef
go back to reference Theeuwes, M., Liefooghe, B., De Schryver, M., & De Houwer, J. (2018). The role of motor imagery in learning via instructions. Acta Psychologica,184, 110–123.CrossRef Theeuwes, M., Liefooghe, B., De Schryver, M., & De Houwer, J. (2018). The role of motor imagery in learning via instructions. Acta Psychologica,184, 110–123.CrossRef
go back to reference Vandierendonck, A., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2010). Task switching: interplay of reconfiguration and interference control. Psychological Bulletin,136(4), 601–626.CrossRef Vandierendonck, A., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2010). Task switching: interplay of reconfiguration and interference control. Psychological Bulletin,136(4), 601–626.CrossRef
go back to reference Wessel, J. R., Jenkinson, N., Brittain, J. S., Voets, S. H., Aziz, T. Z., & Aron, A. R. (2016). Surprise disrupts cognition via a fronto-basal ganglia suppressive mechanism. Nature Communications,7, 11195.CrossRef Wessel, J. R., Jenkinson, N., Brittain, J. S., Voets, S. H., Aziz, T. Z., & Aron, A. R. (2016). Surprise disrupts cognition via a fronto-basal ganglia suppressive mechanism. Nature Communications,7, 11195.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Motor imagery entails task-set inhibition
Auteurs
Juliane Scheil
Thomas Kleinsorge
Baptist Liefooghe
Publicatiedatum
04-04-2019
Uitgeverij
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 6/2020
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-019-01183-5

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2020

Psychological Research 6/2020 Naar de uitgave