Action observation with kinesthetic illusion can produce human motor plasticity

Nojima, Ippei; Koganemaru, Satoko; Kawamata, Toshio; Fukuyama, Hidenao; Mima, Tatsuya

doi:10.1111/ejn.12921

Cited by 32 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 90 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In considering a previous study by Nojima and colleagues [ 22 ], which found behavioural improvements after AO to be dependent on and positively correlated to the degree of kinaesthetic illusion elicited by the AO, it is conceivable that our MIR condition failed to induce a significant enough kinaesthetic illusion in the untrained hand such that this condition failed to elicit performance gains that were superior to those observed in the other feedback groups. One of the potential limitations to the conclusions drawn from the current study is the substantial inter-participant variability observed with respect to performance, both prior to, and following motor training, possibly suggesting a high degree of task complexity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Three groups of participants practiced a fast-as-possible two-ball rotation task with their dominant hand while receiving different types of visual feedback. For a better pictorial representation of how the two balls were rotated within the palm, please refer to Fig 1A out of the Materials and Methods section of Nojima and colleagues [ 22 ]. Participants in the Active Vision (ACT: n = 20, females: 14, mean age = 28.3 years, SD = 8.2 years) and Passive Vision (PAS: n = 20, females: 15, mean age = 25.8 years, SD = 6.3 years) groups focused on the active (training) or inactive (non-training) hand, respectively, while vision of the opposite (unattended) hand was occluded with a custom built stand.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Influence of Mirror-Visual Feedback on Training-Induced Motor Performance Gains in the Untrained Hand

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The well-documented observation of bilateral performance gains following unilateral motor training, a phenomenon known as cross-limb transfer, has important implications for rehabilitation. It has recently been shown that provision of a mirror image of the active hand during unilateral motor training has the capacity to enhance the efficacy of this phenomenon when compared to training without augmented visual feedback (i.e., watching the passive hand), possibly via action observation effects [1]. The current experiment was designed to confirm whether mirror-visual feedback (MVF) during motor training can indeed elicit greater performance gains in the untrained hand compared to more standard visual feedback (i.e., watching the active hand). Furthermore, discussing the mechanisms underlying any such MVF-induced behavioural effects, we suggest that action observation and the cross-activation hypothesis may both play important roles in eliciting cross-limb transfer. Eighty participants practiced a fast-as-possible two-ball rotation task with their dominant hand. During training, three different groups were provided with concurrent visual feedback of the active hand, inactive hand or a mirror image of the active hand with a fourth control group receiving no training. Pre- and post-training performance was measured in both hands. MVF did not increase the extent of training-induced performance changes in the untrained hand following unilateral training above and beyond those observed for other types of feedback. The data are consistent with the notion that cross-limb transfer, when combined with MVF, is mediated by cross-activation with action observation playing a less unique role than previously suggested. Further research is needed to replicate the current and previous studies to determine the clinical relevance and potential benefits of MVF for cases that, due to the severity of impairment, rely on unilateral training programmes of the unaffected limb to drive changes in the contralateral affected limb.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Mirror-Visual Feedback on Training-Induced Motor Performance Gains in the Untrained Hand

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In line with this finding, a recent study described a positive correlation between the performance gain and the vividness of the illusion induced by observing a movie clip showing a hand's motor task on a monitor placed over the participant's hand only when the relative positions of the displayed and the real hand were congruent (Nojima et al . ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Kinaesthetic illusion shapes the cortical plasticity evoked by action observation

Bisio

Biggio

Avanzino

et al. 2019

The Journal of Physiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key points The combination of action observation (AO) and a peripheral nerve stimulation has been shown to induce plasticity in the primary motor cortex (M1). However, using peripheral nerve stimulation little is known about the specificity of the sensory inputs. The current study, using muscle tendon vibration to stimulate muscle spindles and transcranial magnetic stimulation to assess M1 excitability, investigated whether a proprioceptive stimulation leading to a kinaesthetic illusion of movement (KI) was able to evoke M1 plasticity when combined with AO. M1 excitability increased immediately and up to 60 min after AO‐KI stimulation as a function of the vividness of the perceived illusion, and only when the movement directions of AO and KI were congruent. Tactile stimulation coupled with AO and KI alone were not sufficient to induce M1 plasticity. This methodology might be proposed to subjects during a period of immobilization to promote M1 activity without requiring any voluntary movement. Abstract Physical practice is crucial to evoke cortical plasticity, but motor cognition techniques, such as action observation (AO), have shown their potentiality in promoting it when associated with peripheral afferent inputs, without the need of performing a movement. Here we investigated whether the combination of AO and a proprioceptive stimulation, able to evoke a kinaesthetic illusion of movement (KI), induced plasticity in the primary motor cortex (M1). In the main experiment, the role of congruency between the observed action and the illusory movement was explored together with the importance of the specificity of the sensory input modality (proprioceptive vs. tactile stimulation) to induce plasticity in M1. Further, a control experiment was carried out to assess the role of the mere kinaesthetic illusion on M1 excitability. Results showed that the combination of AO and KI evoked plasticity in M1, with an increase of the excitability immediately and up to 60 min after the conditioning protocol (P always <0.05). Notably, a significant increase in M1 excitability occurred only when the directions of the observed and illusory movements were congruent. Further, a significant positive linear relationship was found between the amount of M1 excitability increase and the vividness of the perceived illusion (P = 0.03). Finally, the tactile stimulation coupled with AO was not sufficient to induce changes in M1 excitability as well as the KI alone. All these findings indicate the importance of combining different sensory input signals to induce plasticity in M1, and that proprioception is the most suitable sensory modality to allow it.

show abstract

“…Nonetheless, research over the past decades has recognized that sensory feedback and mental imagery play a significant role in the learning process (Nyberg et al, 2006;Sigrist et al, 2013;Wolpert et al, 2011). In the case of vision, it has been shown that even in the absence of physical training, mere observation of someone else performing a motor task is sufficient to introduce significant gains in subsequent performance of the observer Cross et al, 2009;Kelly et al, 2003;Mattar and Gribble, 2005;Nojima et al, 2015;Vogt and Thomaschke, 2007;Ossmy and Mukamel, 2016). Furthermore, passive limb movement has also been shown to facilitate learning (Beets et al, 2012;Darainy et al, 2013;Vahdat et al, 2014;Wong et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural Network Underlying Intermanual Skill Transfer in Humans

Ossmy

Mukamel

2016

Cell Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Physical practice with one hand results in performance gains of the other (un-practiced) hand, yet the role of sensory feedback and underlying neurophysiology is unclear. Healthy subjects learned sequences of finger movements by physical training with their right hand while receiving real-time movement-based visual feedback via 3D virtual reality devices as if their immobile left hand was training. This manipulation resulted in significantly enhanced performance gain with the immobile hand, which was further increased when left-hand fingers were yoked to passively follow right-hand voluntary movements. Neuroimaging data show that, during training with manipulated visual feedback, activity in the left and right superior parietal lobule and their degree of coupling with motor and visual cortex, respectively, correlate with subsequent left-hand performance gain. These results point to a neural network subserving short-term motor skill learning and may have implications for developing new approaches for learning and rehabilitation in patients with unilateral motor deficits.

show abstract

Action observation with kinesthetic illusion can produce human motor plasticity

Cited by 32 publications

References 90 publications

The Influence of Mirror-Visual Feedback on Training-Induced Motor Performance Gains in the Untrained Hand

The Influence of Mirror-Visual Feedback on Training-Induced Motor Performance Gains in the Untrained Hand

Kinaesthetic illusion shapes the cortical plasticity evoked by action observation

Neural Network Underlying Intermanual Skill Transfer in Humans

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About