Online versus cognitive control: A dividing line between physical action and motor imagery.

IF 2.3 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY
Marie Martel, Scott Glover
{"title":"Online versus cognitive control: A dividing line between physical action and motor imagery.","authors":"Marie Martel, Scott Glover","doi":"10.1037/xhp0001356","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent work in our lab has shown that motor imagery is highly sensitive to tasks that interfere with executive resources, whereas physical actions are largely immune. This has been taken as support for the Motor-Cognitive model of motor imagery and in opposition to the theory of Functional Equivalence. Here, we examined another prediction of the Motor-Cognitive model, namely that an opposite pattern of effects would be observed when the information available for online control was reduced, with physical actions being affected but motor imagery being largely resistant. This was tested in four experiments in which participants performed either physical actions or motor imagery, and in a replication in which they performed both. The experiments manipulated the quality of information available during the online control of movement through: (a) comparing movements made with or without visual feedback (Experiments 1 and 1a); (b) comparing movements made using foveal versus peripheral vision (Experiment 2); and (c) comparing physical to mimed actions (Experiment 3). All four experiments found evidence in favor of the Motor-Cognitive model in that manipulations of online control affected physical action much more than they affected motor imagery. These results were, however, inconsistent with a Functional Equivalence view. We discuss these results in the broader context of other theoretical views of motor imagery. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":50195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance","volume":" ","pages":"1407-1422"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0001356","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent work in our lab has shown that motor imagery is highly sensitive to tasks that interfere with executive resources, whereas physical actions are largely immune. This has been taken as support for the Motor-Cognitive model of motor imagery and in opposition to the theory of Functional Equivalence. Here, we examined another prediction of the Motor-Cognitive model, namely that an opposite pattern of effects would be observed when the information available for online control was reduced, with physical actions being affected but motor imagery being largely resistant. This was tested in four experiments in which participants performed either physical actions or motor imagery, and in a replication in which they performed both. The experiments manipulated the quality of information available during the online control of movement through: (a) comparing movements made with or without visual feedback (Experiments 1 and 1a); (b) comparing movements made using foveal versus peripheral vision (Experiment 2); and (c) comparing physical to mimed actions (Experiment 3). All four experiments found evidence in favor of the Motor-Cognitive model in that manipulations of online control affected physical action much more than they affected motor imagery. These results were, however, inconsistent with a Functional Equivalence view. We discuss these results in the broader context of other theoretical views of motor imagery. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

在线与认知控制:身体行为和运动意象之间的分界线。
我们实验室最近的工作表明,运动意象对干扰执行资源的任务高度敏感,而身体动作在很大程度上是免疫的。这被认为是对运动意象的运动-认知模型的支持,与功能对等理论相反。在这里,我们检验了运动-认知模型的另一个预测,即当可用于在线控制的信息减少时,会观察到相反的效果模式,身体行为受到影响,但运动意象在很大程度上受到抵制。这在四个实验中得到了验证,在这些实验中,参与者要么进行身体动作,要么进行运动想象,然后在一个重复的实验中,他们同时进行这两种动作。实验通过(a)比较有或没有视觉反馈的运动(实验1和1a)来操纵在线运动控制过程中可用信息的质量;(b)比较中央凹视觉和周边视觉的运动(实验2);(c)比较物理动作和模拟动作(实验3)。所有四个实验都发现了支持运动-认知模型的证据,即在线控制操作对身体动作的影响远大于对运动意象的影响。然而,这些结果与功能对等的观点不一致。我们在运动意象的其他理论观点的更广泛的背景下讨论这些结果。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
145
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance publishes studies on perception, control of action, perceptual aspects of language processing, and related cognitive processes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信