A question of intention in motor imagery.
We examined the question-is the intention of completing a simulated motor action the same as the intention used in processing overt actions? Participants used motor imagery to estimate distance reachability in two conditions: Imagery-Only (IO) and Imagery-Execution (IE). With IO (red target) only a verbal estimate using imagery was given. With IE (green target) participants knew that they would actually reach after giving a verbal estimate and be judged on accuracy. After measuring actual maximum reach, used for the comparison, imagery targets were randomly presented across peripersonal- (within reach) and extrapersonal (beyond reach) space. Results indicated no difference in overall accuracy by condition, however, there was a significant distinction by space; participants were more accurate in peripersonal space. Although more research is needed, these findings support an increasing body of evidence suggesting that the neurocognitive processes (in this case, intention) driving motor imagery and overt actions are similar.
Gabbard
Carl
C
Department of Health & Kinesiology, Texas A & M University, TAMU 4243, College Station, TX 77843-4243, USA. c-gabbard@tamu.edu
Cordova
Alberto
A
Lee
Sunghan
S
D006801:Humans; D007092:Imagination; D033182:Intention; D011596:Psychomotor Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D055815:Young Adult