Accessible Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter August 14, 2013

Are Intentional Processes with Tool Use Similar for Simulated and Executed Actions?

Carl Gabbard and Priscila Caçola

Abstract

We asked the question, does motor simulation (via imagery) and planning with execution have similar intentional characteristics? And, does use of a tool compared to arm reaching influence a different intention effect? We instructed participants to use motor imagery to estimate distance reachability with the hand (arm extended) and a 20-cm tool using a NOGO/GO intention paradigm. That is, use of imagery only and imagery with actual execution (IE). Results indicated no differences in accuracy within or between HAND and TOOL conditions. That is, there was no observable intentional effect. These findings lend preliminary support to an increasing body of evidence suggesting that the neurocognitive processes (in this case, intention) driving motor imagery and executed actions are similar for hand and tool use.

References

Burianová, H., Marstaller, L., Sowman, P., Tesan, G., Richl, A. N., Williams, M., Johnson, W. B. (2013). Multimodal functional imaging of motor imagery using a novel paradigm. NeuroImage, 71, 5058. Search in Google Scholar

Caçola, P., & Gabbard, C. (2012). Modulating peripersonal and extrapersonal reach space via tool use: A comparison between 6- to 12-year-olds and young adults. Experimental Brain Research, 218(2), 321330. Search in Google Scholar

Carello, C., Grosofsky, A., Reichel, F. D., Soloan, H. Y., & Turvey, M. T. (1989). Visually perceiving what is reachable. Ecological Psychology, 1, 2754. Search in Google Scholar

Choi, H. J., & Mark, L. S. (2004). Scaling affordances for human reach actions. Human Movement Science, 23, 785806. Search in Google Scholar

Coello, Y., & Delevoye-Turrell, Y. (2007). Embodiment, spatial categorization and action. Consciousness and Cognition, 16(3), 667683. Search in Google Scholar

Crémers, J., Dessoullières, A., & Garraux, G. (2012). Hemispheric specialization during mental imagery of brisk walking. Human Brain Mapping, 33(4), 873882. Search in Google Scholar

de Grave, D. D. J., Brenner, E., & Smeets, J. B. F. (2011). Using a stick does not necessarily alter judged distances or reachability. PLoS One, 6(2), e16697. Search in Google Scholar

Gabbard, C., & Caçola, P. (2009). The role of intentionality in simulated motor actions. Journal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical Activity, 4(1), Article 4. Search in Google Scholar

Gabbard, C., Cordova, A., & Lee, S. (2009). A question of intention in motor imagery. Consciousness and Cognition, 18, 300305. Search in Google Scholar

Grèzes, J., & Decety, J. (2001). Functional anatomy of execution, mental simulation, observation, and verb generation of actions: A meta-analysis. Human Brain Mapping, 12, 119. Search in Google Scholar

Jeannerod, M. (1997). The cognitive neuroscience of action. Oxford: Blackwell. Search in Google Scholar

Jeannerod, M. (2006). Motor cognition: What actions tell the self. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Johnson, H., & Haggard, P. (2002). Motor awareness without perceptual awareness. Neuropsychologia, 43, 227237. Search in Google Scholar

Lorey, B., Pilgramm, S., Walter, B., Stark, R., Munzert, J., & Zentgraf, K. (2010). Your mind’s hand: Motor imagery of pointing movements with different accuracy. NeuroImage, 49, 32393247. Search in Google Scholar

Mizuguchi, N., Nakata, H., Hayashi, T., Sakamoto, M., Muraoka, T., Uchida, Y., & Kanosue, K. (2013). Brain activity during motor imagery of an action with an object: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroscience Research (available online). doi:10.1016/j.neures.2013.03.012 Search in Google Scholar

Munzert, J. (2009). Motor imagery and its implications for understanding the motor system. Progress in Brain Research, 174, 219229. Search in Google Scholar

Ramsey, R., Cummings, J., Eastough, D., & Edwards, M. (2010). Incongruent imagery interferes with action initiation. Brain and Cognition, 74(3), 249254. Search in Google Scholar

Rieger, M., & Massen, C. (2013). Tool characteristics in imagery of tool actions. Psychological Research.doi:10.1007/s00426-013-0481 Search in Google Scholar

Tomasino, B., Weiss, P. H., & Fink, G. R. (2012). Imagined tool-use in near and far space modulates the extra-striate body area. Neuropsychologia, 50(10), 24672476. Search in Google Scholar

Witt, J. K., & Proffitt, D. R. (2008). Action-specific influences on distance perception: A role of motor simulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 14791492. Search in Google Scholar

Witt, J. K., Proffitt, D. R., & Epstein, W. (2005). Tool use affects perceived distance, but only when you intend to use it. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(5), 880888. Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2013-08-14

©2013 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin / Boston