Cargando…

Time course of learning sequence representations in action imagery practice

Action imagery practice (AIP) is effective to improve motor performance in a variety of tasks, though it is often less effective than action execution practice (AEP). In sequence learning, AIP and AEP result in the acquisition of effector-independent representations. However, it is unresolved whethe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dahm, Stephan F., Rieger, Martina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7614144/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36549085
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2022.103050
_version_ 1783605570459140096
author Dahm, Stephan F.
Rieger, Martina
author_facet Dahm, Stephan F.
Rieger, Martina
author_sort Dahm, Stephan F.
collection PubMed
description Action imagery practice (AIP) is effective to improve motor performance in a variety of tasks, though it is often less effective than action execution practice (AEP). In sequence learning, AIP and AEP result in the acquisition of effector-independent representations. However, it is unresolved whether effector-dependent representations can be acquired in AIP. In the present study, we investigated the acquisition of effector-independent representations and effector-dependent representations in AEP and AIP in an implicit sequence learning task (a visual serial-reaction-time task, involving a twelve-element sequence). Participants performed six sessions, each starting with tests. A practice sequence, a mirror sequence, and a different sequence were tested with the practice and transfer hand. In the first four sessions, after the tests, two groups performed either AIP (N = 50) or AEP (N = 54). Improvement in the different sequence indicated sequence-unspecific learning in both AEP and AIP. Importantly, reaction times of the practice hand became shorter in the practice sequence than in the other sequences, indicating implicit sequence learning in both, AEP and AIP. This effect was stronger in the practice hand than in the transfer hand, indicating effector-dependent sequence representations in both AEP and AIP. However, effector-dependent sequence representations were stronger in AEP than in AIP. No significant differences between groups were observed in the transfer hand, although effector-independent sequence representations were observed in AEP only. In conclusion, AIP promotes not only sequence-unspecific stimulus-response coupling and anticipations of the subsequent stimuli, but also anticipations of the subsequent responses.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7614144
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76141442023-02-04 Time course of learning sequence representations in action imagery practice Dahm, Stephan F. Rieger, Martina Hum Mov Sci Article Action imagery practice (AIP) is effective to improve motor performance in a variety of tasks, though it is often less effective than action execution practice (AEP). In sequence learning, AIP and AEP result in the acquisition of effector-independent representations. However, it is unresolved whether effector-dependent representations can be acquired in AIP. In the present study, we investigated the acquisition of effector-independent representations and effector-dependent representations in AEP and AIP in an implicit sequence learning task (a visual serial-reaction-time task, involving a twelve-element sequence). Participants performed six sessions, each starting with tests. A practice sequence, a mirror sequence, and a different sequence were tested with the practice and transfer hand. In the first four sessions, after the tests, two groups performed either AIP (N = 50) or AEP (N = 54). Improvement in the different sequence indicated sequence-unspecific learning in both AEP and AIP. Importantly, reaction times of the practice hand became shorter in the practice sequence than in the other sequences, indicating implicit sequence learning in both, AEP and AIP. This effect was stronger in the practice hand than in the transfer hand, indicating effector-dependent sequence representations in both AEP and AIP. However, effector-dependent sequence representations were stronger in AEP than in AIP. No significant differences between groups were observed in the transfer hand, although effector-independent sequence representations were observed in AEP only. In conclusion, AIP promotes not only sequence-unspecific stimulus-response coupling and anticipations of the subsequent stimuli, but also anticipations of the subsequent responses. 2023-02-01 2022-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7614144/ /pubmed/36549085 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2022.103050 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Dahm, Stephan F.
Rieger, Martina
Time course of learning sequence representations in action imagery practice
title Time course of learning sequence representations in action imagery practice
title_full Time course of learning sequence representations in action imagery practice
title_fullStr Time course of learning sequence representations in action imagery practice
title_full_unstemmed Time course of learning sequence representations in action imagery practice
title_short Time course of learning sequence representations in action imagery practice
title_sort time course of learning sequence representations in action imagery practice
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7614144/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36549085
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2022.103050
work_keys_str_mv AT dahmstephanf timecourseoflearningsequencerepresentationsinactionimagerypractice
AT riegermartina timecourseoflearningsequencerepresentationsinactionimagerypractice