No abstract

It is assumed that imagining oneself from a first-person perspective (1PP) is more embodied than a third-person perspective (3PP). Therefore, 1PP imagery should lead to more activity in motor and motor-related structures, and the postural configuration of one's own body should be particularly relevant in 1PP simulation. The present study investigated whether proprioceptive information on hand position is integrated similarly in 1PP and 3PP imagery of hand movements. During functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanning, 20 right-handed female college students watched video sequences of different hand movements with their right hand in a compatible versus incompatible posture and subsequently performed 1PP or 3PP imagery of the movement. Results showed stronger activation in left hemisphere motor and motor-related structures, especially the inferior parietal lobe, on 1PP compared with 3PP trials. Activation in the left inferior parietal lobe (parietal operculum, SII) and the insula was stronger in 1PP trials with compatible compared with incompatible posture. Thus, proprioceptive information on actual body posture is more relevant for 1PP imagery processes. Results support the embodied nature of 1PP imagery and indicate possible applications in athletic training or rehabilitation.

The simulation concept suggested by Jeannerod (Neuroimage 14:S103-S109, 2001) defines the S-states of action observation and mental simulation of action as action-related mental states lacking overt execution. Within this framework, similarities and neural overlap between S-states and overt execution are interpreted as providing the common basis for the motor representations implemented within the motor system. The present brain imaging study compared activation overlap and differential activation during mental simulation (motor imagery) with that while observing gymnastic movements. The fMRI conjunction analysis revealed overlapping activation for both S-states in primary motor cortex, premotor cortex, and the supplementary motor area as well as in the intraparietal sulcus, cerebellar hemispheres, and parts of the basal ganglia. A direct contrast between the motor imagery and observation conditions revealed stronger activation for imagery in the posterior insula and the anterior cingulate gyrus. The hippocampus, the superior parietal lobe, and the cerebellar areas were differentially activated in the observation condition. In general, these data corroborate the concept of action-related S-states because of the high overlap in core motor as well as in motor-related areas. We argue that differential activity between S-states relates to task-specific and modal information processing.

The action observation network (AON) is supposed to play a crucial role when athletes anticipate the effect of others' actions in sports such as tennis. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to explore whether motor expertise leads to a differential activation pattern within the AON during effect anticipation and whether spatial and motor anticipation tasks are associated with a differential activation pattern within the AON depending on participant expertise level. Expert (N=16) and novice (N=16) tennis players observed video clips depicting forehand strokes with the instruction to either indicate the predicted direction of ball flight (spatial anticipation) or to decide on an appropriate response to the observed action (motor anticipation). The experts performed better than novices on both tennis anticipation tasks, with the experts showing stronger neural activation in areas of the AON, namely, the superior parietal lobe, the intraparietal sulcus, the inferior frontal gyrus, and the cerebellum. When novices were contrasted with experts, motor anticipation resulted in stronger activation of the ventral premotor cortex, the supplementary motor area, and the superior parietal lobe than spatial anticipation task did. In experts, the comparison of motor and spatial anticipation revealed no increased activation. We suggest that the stronger activation of areas in the AON during the anticipation of action effects in experts reflects their use of the more fine-tuned motor representations they have acquired and improved during years of training. Furthermore, results suggest that the neural processing of different anticipation tasks depends on the expertise level.

BackgroundGingivitis and other plaque-associated diseases have a high prevalence in western communities even though the majority of adults report daily oral hygiene. This indicates a lack of oral hygiene skills. Currently, there is no clear evidence as to which brushing technique would bring about the best oral hygiene skills. While the modified Bass technique is often recommended by dentists and in textbooks, the Fones technique is often recommended in patient brochures. Still, standardized comparisons of the effectiveness of teaching these techniques are lacking.Methodology/Principal FindingsIn a final sample of n = 56 students, this multidisciplinary, randomized, examiner-blinded, controlled study compared the effects of parallel and standardized interactive computer presentations teaching either the Fones or the modified Bass technique. A control group was taught the basics of tooth brushing alone. Oral hygiene skills (remaining plaque after thorough oral hygiene) and gingivitis were assessed at baseline and 6, 12, and 28 weeks after the intervention. We found a significant group×time interaction for gingivitis (F(4/102) = 3.267; p = 0.016; ε = 0.957; η2 = 0.114) and a significant main effect of group for oral hygiene skills (F(2/51) = 7.088; p = 0.002; η2 = 0.218). Fones was superior to Bass; Bass did not differ from the control group. Group differences were most prominent after 6 and 12 weeks.Conclusions/SignificanceThe present trial indicates an advantage of teaching the Fones as compared to the modified Bass technique with respect to oral hygiene skills and gingivitis. Future studies are needed to analyze whether the disadvantage of teaching the Bass technique observed here is restricted to the teaching method employed.Trial RegistrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00003488

One finding in recent motor control and learning research is that an external focus (i.e., attending to environmental aspects) improves performance, whereas an internal focus (i.e., controlling bodily movements) impedes it. Despite being replicated in behavioral studies, the neurophysiological basis of this phenomenon remains largely unknown. The present authors separate global attention to actions into an external and an internal focus. Using a between-participants design, participants were either trained to attend to moving their fingers (internal focus) or to the keys to be hit (external focus) during learning a finger sequence. Subsequently, they applied functional magnetic resonance imaging under focus (internal/external), dual task, and move-only conditions. Results revealed higher activation in primary somatosensory and motor cortex for an external compared to an internal focus. The authors conclude that external participants focused on the task-related environment (i.e., the keys) to enhance tactile input to somatosensory areas that closely connect to motor areas.

The present study examined the neural basis of vivid motor imagery with parametrical functional magnetic resonance imaging. 22 participants performed motor imagery (MI) of six different right-hand movements that differed in terms of pointing accuracy needs and object involvement, i.e., either none, two big or two small squares had to be pointed at in alternation either with or without an object grasped with the fingers. After each imagery trial, they rated the perceived vividness of motor imagery on a 7-point scale. Results showed that increased perceived imagery vividness was parametrically associated with increasing neural activation within the left putamen, the left premotor cortex (PMC), the posterior parietal cortex of the left hemisphere, the left primary motor cortex, the left somatosensory cortex, and the left cerebellum. Within the right hemisphere, activation was found within the right cerebellum, the right putamen, and the right PMC. It is concluded that the perceived vividness of MI is parametrically associated with neural activity within sensorimotor areas. The results corroborate the hypothesis that MI is an outcome of neural computations based on movement representations located within motor areas.

Simulation theory proposes motor imagery (MI) to be a simulation based on representations also used for motor execution (ME). Nonetheless, it is unclear how far they use the same neural code. We use multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) and representational similarity analysis (RSA) to describe the neural representations associated with MI and ME within the frontoparietal motor network. During functional magnetic resonance imaging scanning, 20 volunteers imagined or executed 3 different types of right-hand actions. Results of MVPA showed that these actions as well as their modality (MI or ME) could be decoded significantly above chance from the spatial patterns of BOLD signals in premotor and posterior parietal cortices. This was also true for cross-modal decoding. Furthermore, representational dissimilarity matrices of frontal and parietal areas showed that MI and ME representations formed separate clusters, but that the representational organization of action types within these clusters was identical. For most ROIs, this pattern of results best fits with a model that assumes a low-to-moderate degree of similarity between the neural patterns associated with MI and ME. Thus, neural representations of MI and ME are neither the same nor totally distinct but exhibit a similar structural geometry with respect to different types of action.