bioRxiv Science⌕ Search

Biology subjects

Hardwick, R. M.

Publications and source records attributed to Hardwick, R. M..

15 recordsLinked to original sources

Impact of repetition on physical and imagined movements

Motor imagery and overt action are proposed to share common planning mechanisms while relying on distinct processes during movement performance. To investigate how repetition affects physical and imagined movements, participants physically or mentally drew paths while avoiding barriers. The barrier orientations were either repeated or different across consecutive trials, and the modality (execution or imagery) of the trials either changed or remained the same for two consecutive trials. Reaction time and movement time were analysed as measures of movement planning and task performance, respectively. Imagined movements produced longer reaction times and movement times than physical movements. Repetition of orientation reduced reaction times in both physical and imagined trials, indicating that trajectory repetition facilitated movement preparation. In contrast, previous trial type influenced reaction times only for physical movements, which were only initiated faster when preceded by another physical trial. Different effects emerged for movement time. Physical movements were faster when the same trajectory was repeated no matter the previous trial type, whereas imagined movements were unaffected by orientation and instead showed shorter durations when preceded by another imagined trial. The findings indicate that physical and imagined movements rely on more similar trajectory representations during the planning stage, but diverge during task performance. While physical movements appear to benefit from the persistence of previously generated movement trajectories, imagined trials seems more influenced by modality-specific cognitive processes. These results provide behavioural support for the Motor-Cognitive model and contribute to understanding how movement repetition influences overt and imagined actions.

neuroscience↗

Mental Timing in Locomotion: Walking Across Real and Imagined Distances

The present study aimed to directly replicate the seminal findings of Decety et al. (1989), while also extending the original work with a larger sample size and additional statistical analyses. Thirty healthy adults completed both imagined and executed walking tasks over distances of 5, 10, and 15 meters. Participants also completed the Movement Imagery Questionnaire 3 (MIQ 3). Temporal correspondence between imagined and executed walking was assessed using repeated-measures ANOVA, correlation analyses, Bayesian equivalence tests, and Bland Altman analyses. Walking duration increased significantly with distance, while no significant differences were observed between imagined and executed walking times. Bayesian equivalence tests provided evidence supporting temporal equivalence between the two modalities, and Bland Altman analyses indicated good agreement with minimal systematic bias. Strong positive correlations were found between imagined and executed durations at all distances. MIQ-3 scores were not significantly associated with differences between imagined and executed walking durations. Overall, the findings successfully replicate and extend the original results reported by Decety et al. (1989), providing additional evidence supporting temporal equivalence between motor imagery and movement execution. By combining a larger sample size with contemporary statistical approaches, the present study strengthens support for the principle of functional equivalence for highly automated and cyclic movements.

neuroscience↗

Timecourse of corticospinal excitability for observed action: evidence of early suppression followed by return to baseline without facilitation

IntroductionAction observation modulates corticospinal excitability, with most previous studies indicating an increase in excitability in the muscles involved in the observed movement. In addition, previous work suggests that modulation of corticospinal excitability could be specific to the timing of the stimulation, muscle, and direction of movement. Here we examined the influence of these factors on corticospinal excitability. MethodParticipants observed stimuli presenting a static hand, followed by an image of the endpoint of an index/little finger abduction movement. Transcranial magnetic stimulation was delivered at time points from 100-800ms after movement onset. Stimuli were presented in various orientations to study possible effects of anatomical positioning and movement direction, compared relative to the control condition of a static hand. ResultsCorticospinal excitability was lower at early timings (100-400ms), before rising to a plateau at later timings (500-800ms) which did not differ from the static hand condition. This facilitation was muscle-specific, with higher excitability for the muscle involved in the observed movement. By contrast, the relative direction of movement did not influence corticospinal excitability. DiscussionThese results replicate the time-dependent modulation of corticospinal excitability induced by action observation; however, we argue that simply interpreting such effects as an increase in excitability may be overly simplistic. In line with previous studies, we argue that the choice of control condition used during action observation studies may be critical to the overall direction of effects.

neuroscience↗

'RMT-Finder': an automated procedure to determine the Resting Motor Threshold for Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

BackgroundTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) studies identify the Resting Motor Threshold (RMT) to calibrate stimulation intensity. However, this procedure is time-consuming and subject to variability. We developed an automated procedure to improve the efficiency and standardization of RMT determination. New methodWe developed an algorithm that measures MEP amplitudes and automatically adjusts stimulation intensity to determine the RMT. Experiment 1 compared this automated method with the manual procedure in terms of reliability and equivalence. Experiment 2 developed a "Fast" automated process, assessing it against both the manual and initial automated procedures. ResultsAcross both experiments the automated approach demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability and strong agreement with the manual method (Intraclass Correlation Coefficients [&ge;]0.95), giving estimates of RMT statistically equivalent to those of manual measurements within {+/-}3% MSO, with the majority of comparisons within {+/-}2% MSO. Experiment 2 optimized the procedure, allowing empirical determination of the RMT in an average of <3 minutes with only 33-34 pulses. Comparison with existing methods RMT-Finder provides a reliable and time-efficient alternative to manual approaches. To the best of our knowledge RMT-Finder presents the first closed-loop feedback approach to identify the RMT without manual intervention. This procedure can improve standardization and reproducibility in TMS studies. ConclusionsAutomating RMT assessment allows rapid and highly reproducible assessment of this standard TMS measurement, making it viable for inclusion in routine clinical applications that require standardized procedures.

neuroscience↗

A comprehensive, open-source battery of movement imagery ability tests: Development and psychometric properties

Imagining actions is a covert and multidimensional skill difficult to quantify. Comprehensive assessments rarely combine measures of imagery generation, maintenance, and manipulation. We developed and validated a combination of tests to assess these processes of movement imagery, online. 180 healthy individuals completed the MIQ-RS questionnaire (generation), the Imagined Finger Sequence Task (iFST; maintenance), and the Hand Laterality Judgement Task (HLJT; manipulation). MIQ-RS showed a bifactorial structure (visual and kinesthetic modalities) according to confirmatory factor analysis, and its reliability (internal consistency) was good. In the iFST, internal validity analyses via generalized mixed models showed a clear effect of sequence complexity, stronger for execution than imagery. Reliability, estimated via signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) using hierarchical Bayesian models, was also adequate (SNR [&ge;] 1.6). In the HLJT, expected effects of rotation angle, hand view, and their interaction, consistent with biomechanical constraints, were also found. Reliability was also adequate (SNR [&ge;] 1.75). Criterion validity across tests, assessed using Bayesian Spearmans correlations, showed that correlations were generally absent (BF01 [&ge;] 3), and when present, of small magnitude (r [&le;] 0.27). Test-retest reliability (123 participants reassessed 6-8 days after), computed via Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs), was generally adequate (ICCs [&ge;] 0.67). We conclude that the online versions of these tests showed adequate structural/internal validity and (test-retest) reliability. However, weak criterion validity suggests individuals with high ability to generate movement imagery may not necessarily have high ability to maintain and/or manipulate movement imagery, underscoring the need for comprehensive assessment of this capacity.

neuroscience↗

Comparing electromyography, accelerometry, and visual inspection to assess the resting motor threshold for transcranial magnetic stimulation

IntroductionElectromyography (EMG) remains the gold standard for estimating the Resting Motor Threshold (RMT) in Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) studies, but its cost and limited accessibility often lead researchers to use visual inspection (VIS). However, VIS may introduce variability and systematic bias. Accelerometry (ACC) offers a cost-effective, objective alternative to capture TMS-evoked responses. ObjectiveTo compare the RMT as estimated using EMG, ACC, and VIS. MethodsFive participants underwent TMS while EMG, ACC, and video recordings were collected. Separately, 64 observers judged hand movement in videos to estimate RMT via VIS. RMTs were compared across the three methods using Bayesian model comparison, Bland-Altman analyses, and Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs). ResultsRMTs estimated via EMG were lower than those obtained using either ACC or VIS. Compared to EMG, VIS tended to overestimate RMT (mean bias = 5.23%, 95%CI = [1.00-11.00]), while ACC and VIS estimates were more closely aligned (mean bias = 0.43%, 95%CI = [-4.00 - 5.00]). ICC (2,1) values indicated moderate reliability for VIS vs EMG (mean = 0.580, 95%CI = [0.389 - 0.748]), and good-to-excellent reliability for VIS vs ACC (mean = 0.845). However, bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals identified significant variability in the estimates provided by visual inspection, ranging from +1 to +11 for VIS vs EMG, but as low as -4 to +5 for VIS vs ACC. ConclusionsEMG remains the most sensitive technique for estimating the RMT, but when EMG is not feasible, accelerometery provides a quantifiable, more objective, and less variable alternative than visual inspection. HighlightsO_LIVisual inspection introduces observer-related variability in RMT estimation C_LIO_LIVisual inspection & accelerometry systematically overestimate RMT compared to EMG C_LIO_LIEMG remains the most sensitive method for estimating RMT C_LIO_LIAccelerometry is an objective alternative to visual inspection if EMG is unavailable C_LI

neuroscience↗

Information processing in the Hand Laterality Judgement Task: Fundamental differences between dorsal and palmar views revealed by a Forced Response paradigm

Imagining performing movements (motor imagery) has broad applications from fundamental neuroscience to sports and rehabilitation. However, measuring motor imagery ability is challenging due to its covert nature. While the Hand Laterality Judgement Task (HLJT) has been investigated as a measure of implicit motor imagery ability, our understanding of mechanisms underlying performance of the task is limited. We used a forced response paradigm to study the time-course of information processing in the HLJT. Participants (N=54) performed a modified HLJT where the time they had to process the stimulus was manipulated on a trial-by-trial basis, allowing us to reconstruct the time-course of information processing. Generalised Additive Mixed Models assessed the relationship between processing time and accuracy, which varied across rotation angles (0{degrees} to 180{degrees} in 45{degrees} steps), hand views (dorsal or palmar) or directions (medial or lateral). Stimulus rotation substantively increased the time needed to produce a correct response, although this effect was non-monotonic. Computational modelling confirmed a crucial interaction between hand view and rotation angle, identifying fundamental differences in processing for palmar stimuli with more extreme rotations ([&ge;]135{degrees}) compared to other stimuli. Finally, a biomechanical constraints effect (i.e. faster processing of medial vs laterally rotated stimuli) was present in both views, but was only statistically significant in palmar views, again suggesting differences in processing palmar and dorsal stimuli. These results improve our understanding of the cognitive processes underlying the HLJT and may have broader importance for our understanding of mental processes implicated in motor imagery.

neuroscience↗

Development and validation of an open-source Hand Laterality Judgement Task for in-person and online studies

The Hand Laterality Judgement Task (HLJT) is considered a measure of the ability to manipulate motor images. The biomechanical constraints effect (longer reaction times for hand rotations towards anatomically difficult versus biomechanically easier movements) is considered the behavioural hallmark indicating motor imagery is being used. Previous work has used diverse HLJT paradigms, and there is no standardized procedure for the task. We developed an open-source, freely available version of the HLJT in PsychoPy2, which needs no programming skills and is highly customisable. Some studies suggest responding to the HLJT with the hands may interfere with performance, which would limit practical application of the task. We examined this potential issue using in-person and online versions. For the in-person version, 40 right-footed/handed individuals performed the HLJT with their feet or bimanually (N=20 each). For the online version, 60 right-handed individuals performed the task bimanually or unimanually (N=20 each). Bayesian mixed-effect analyses quantified the evidence for and against equivalence within and between the in-person and online versions. Both versions replicated previously described behavioural phenomena, including effects of angle, hand view, and the biomechanical constraints effect. While responding with different effectors modified overall reaction times, it did not interact with other factors analysed, and did not affect accuracy or the biomechanical constraints effect. There was also evidence for equivalence between in-person and online bimanual groups for all measures. We conclude that this open-source, standardized HLJT protocol (available at https://osf.io/8h7ec/) can reliably detect previously identified effects and works equally well in-person or online.

neuroscience↗

Separate timescales for spatial and anatomical information processing during action observation

Observing different body stimuli can influence the speed and accuracy of our responses. Prior work indicates this effect is influenced by factors such as spatial congruence and perspective. We hypothesized that the influence of these factors would vary depending on the amount of time that participants had to process visual stimuli. Experiment 1 was a reaction time task (n=29) with stimuli varying in spatial congruence (congruent, incongruent, neutral), perspective (first- or third-person) and stimulus type (body or control). Experiment 2 (n=50) used the same stimuli in a "Forced Response" paradigm, which controlled the time participants had to prepare a response. This allowed us to assess responses as a function of preparation time. Experiment 1 showed effects of spatial congruence, with longer reaction times and more errors for spatially incongruent stimuli. This effect was greater for body stimuli. Experiment 2 showed that spatial information was processed faster than anatomical information, inducing incorrect responses at short preparation times for spatially incongruent body stimuli. There was little-to-no corresponding effect for control stimuli. Both experiments also showed weak-to-no effects of perspective, which appear to have been driven by spatial congruence. Our results indicate that spatial information is processed faster than anatomical information during observation of body stimuli. These data are consistent with the dual visual streams hypothesis, whereby spatial information would be processed rapidly via the dorsal stream, while anatomical processing would occur later via the ventral stream. These data also indicate differences in processing between body and control stimuli. Public significance statementsThis study provides novel insight into the time-course of information processing, showing that spatial information is processed faster than anatomical information for body stimuli. The results also challenge the established view that visual perspective is critical to process body stimuli, demonstrating that this may instead result from lower-level effects of spatial congruence.

neuroscience↗

Consistent Under-reporting of Task Details in Motor Imagery Research

Motor Imagery is a subject of longstanding scientific interest. However, critical details of motor imagery protocols are not always reported in full, hampering direct replication and translation of this work. The present review provides a quantitative assessment of the prevalence of under-reporting in the recent motor imagery literature. Publications from the years 2018-2020 were examined, with 695 meeting the inclusion criteria for further examination. Of these studies, 64% (445/695) did not provide information about the modality of motor imagery (i.e., kinesthetic, visual, or a mixture of both) used in the study. When visual or mixed imagery was specified, the details of the visual perspective to be used (i.e., first person, third person, or combinations of both) were not reported in 24% (25/103) of studies. Further analysis indicated that studies using questionnaires to assess motor imagery reported more information than those that did not. We conclude that studies using motor imagery consistently under-report key details of their protocols, which poses a significant problem for understanding, replicating, and translating motor imagery effects.

neuroscience↗

Age-related increases in reaction time result from slower preparation, not delayed initiation

Recent work indicates that healthy younger adults can prepare accurate responses faster than their voluntary reaction times indicate, leaving a seemingly unnecessary delay of 80-100ms before responding. Here we examined how the preparation of movements, initiation of movements, and the delay between them are affected by ageing. Participants made planar reaching movements in two conditions. The Free Reaction Time condition assessed the voluntary reaction times with which participants responded to the appearance of a stimulus. The Forced Reaction Time condition assessed the minimum time actually needed to prepare accurate movements by controlling the time allowed for movement preparation. The time taken to both initiate movements in the Free Reaction Time and to prepare movements in the Forced Response condition increased with age. Notably, the time required to prepare accurate movements was significantly shorter than participants self-selected initiation times; however, the delay between movement preparation and initiation remained consistent across the lifespan (~90ms). These results indicate that the slower reaction times of healthy older adults are not due to an increased hesitancy to respond, but can instead be attributed to changes in their ability to process stimuli and prepare movements accordingly, consistent with age-related changes in brain structure and function.

neuroscience↗

Skill Acquisition is Enhanced by Reducing Trial-To-Trial Repetition

Developing approaches to improve motor skill learning is of considerable interest across multiple disciplines. Previous research has typically shown that repeating the same action on consecutive trials enhances short-term performance, but has detrimental effects on longer term skill acquisition. However, most prior research has contrasted the effects of repetition only at the block level; here we examined the effects of repeating individual trials embedded in a larger randomized block a feature that is often overlooked when generating random trial orders in learning tasks. With four days of practice, a "Minimal Repeats Group", who rarely experienced repeating stimuli on consecutive trials during training improved to a greater extent than a "Frequent Repeats Group", who were frequently presented with repeating stimuli on consecutive trials during training. Our results extend the previous finding of the beneficial effects of random as compared to blocked practice on performance, showing that reduced trial-to-trial repetition during training is favorable with regards to skill learning. This research highlights that limiting the number of repeats on consecutive trials is a simple behavioral manipulation that can enhance the process of skill learning. Data/analysis code and supplementary materials available at https://osf.io/p3278/ NEW & NOTEWORTHYNumerous studies have shown that performing different sub-tasks across consecutive blocks of trials enhances learning. Here we examined whether the same effect would occur on a trial-to-trial level. Our Minimal Repeats Group, who primarily responded to different stimuli on consecutive trials, learned more than our Frequent Repeats Group, who frequently responded to the same stimulus on consecutive trials. This shows that minimizing trial-to-trial repetition is a simple and easily applicable manipulation that can enhance learning.

neuroscience↗

Symmetric Intralimb Transfer of Skilled Isometric Force Production

Motor control theories propose that the same motor plans can be employed by different effectors. Skills learned with one effector can therefore transfer to others, which has potential applications in clinical situations. However, evidence from visuomotor adaptation suggests this effect is asymmetric; learning can be generalized from proximal-to-distal effectors (e.g. arm to hand), but not from distal-to-proximal effectors (e.g. hand to arm). We propose that skill learning may not be subject to this asymmetry, as it relies on multiple learning processes beyond error detection and correction. Participants learned a skill task involving the production of isometric forces. We assessed their ability to perform the task with the hand and arm. One group trained to perform the task using only their hand, while a second trained using only their arm. In a final assessment, we found that participants who trained with either effector improved their skill in performing the task with both their hand and arm. There was no change in a control group that did not train between assessments, indicating that gains were related to the training, not the multiple assessments. These results indicate that in contrast to visuomotor adaptation, motor skills can generalize from both proximal-to-distal and distal-to-proximal effectors. We propose this is due to differences in the processes underlying skill acquisition in comparison to visuomotor adaptation.\n\nNew and NoteworthyPrior research indicates that motor learning transfers from proximal-to-distal effectors, but not vice-versa. However, this work focused on adapting existing behavior; we questioned whether different results would occur when learning new motor skills. We found that the benefits of training on a skill task with either the hand or arm transferred across both effectors. This highlights important differences between adaptation and skill learning, and may allow therapeutic benefits for patients with impairments in specific effectors.

neuroscience↗

Skill Acquisition and Habit Formation as Distinct Effects of Practice

Converging evidence indicates that separate goal-directed and habitual systems compete to control behavior1. However, it has proven difficult to reliably induce habitual behavior in human participants2-4. We reasoned that habits may be present in the form of habitually prepared responses, but are overridden by goal-directed processes, preventing their overt expression. Here we show that latent habits can be unmasked by limiting the time participants have to respond to a stimulus. Participants trained for 4 days on a visuomotor association task. By continuously varying the time allowed to prepare responses, we found that the probability of expressing a learned habit followed a stereotyped time course, peaking 300-600ms after stimulus presentation. This time course was captured by a computational model of response preparation in which habitual responses are automatically prepared at short latency, but are replaced by goal-directed responses at longer latency. A more extensive period of practice (20 days) led to increased habit expression by reducing the average time of movement initiation. These findings refine our understanding of habits, and show that practice can influence habitual behavior in distinct ways: by promoting habit formation, and by modulating the likelihood of habit expression.

neuroscience↗

Neural Correlates of Motor Imagery, Action Observation, and Movement Execution: A Comparison Across Quantitative Meta-Analyses

There is longstanding interest in the relationship between motor imagery, action observation, and movement execution. Several models propose that these tasks recruit the same brain regions in a similar manner; however, there is no quantitative synthesis of the literature that compares their respective networks. Here we summarized data from neuroimaging experiments examining Motor Imagery (303 experiments, 4,902 participants), Action Observation (595 experiments, 11,032 participants), and related control tasks involving Movement Execution (142 experiments, 2,302 participants). Motor Imagery recruited a network of premotor-parietal cortical regions, alongside the thalamus, putamen, and cerebellum. Action Observation involved a cortical premotor-parietal and occipital network, with no consistent subcortical contributions. Movement Execution engaged sensorimotor-premotor areas, and the thalamus, putamen, and cerebellum. Comparisons across these networks highlighted key differences in their recruitment of motor cortex,and parietal cortex, and subcortical structures. Conjunction across all three tasks identified a consistent premotor-parietal and somatosensory network. These data amend previous models of the relationships between motor imagery, action observation, and movement execution, and quantify the relationships between their respective networks.\n\nHighlightsO_LIWe compared quantitative meta-analyses of movement imagery, observation, and execution\nC_LIO_LISubcortical structures were most commonly associated with imagery and execution\nC_LIO_LIConjunctions identified a consistent premotor-parietal-somatosensory network\nC_LIO_LIThese data can inform basic and translational work using imagery and observation\nC_LI

neuroscience↗