Do musicians learn a fine sequential hand motor skill differently than non-musicians?

Abstract

Do professional musicians learn a fine sequential hand motor skill more efficiently than non-musicians? Is this also the case when they perform motor imagery, which implies that they only mentally simulate these movements? Musicians and non-musicians performed a Go/NoGo discrete sequence production (DSP) task, which allows to separate sequence-specific from a-specific learning effects. In this task five stimuli, to be memorized during a preparation interval, signaled a response sequence. In a practice phase, different response sequences had to be either executed, imagined, or inhibited, which was indicated by different response cues. In a test phase, responses were required to familiar (previously executed, imagined, or inhibited) and unfamiliar sequences. In both phases, response times and response accuracy were measured while the electroencephalogram (EEG) was only registered during the practice phase to compare activity between motor imagery, motor execution, and motor inhibition for both groups. Results in the practice phase revealed that musicians learned the response sequences faster and more accurately than non-musicians although no difference in initiation time was found. EEG analyses revealed similar lateralized activity during learning a motor skill for both groups. Our results from the test phase showed better sequence-a-specific learning effects (i.e., faster response times and increased accuracy) for musicians than for non-musicians. Moreover, we revealed that non-musicians benefit more from physical execution while learning a required motor sequence, whereas sequence-specific learning effects due to learning with motor imagery were very similar for musicians and non-musicians.

The 10-Point Plan 2021: Updated Concepts for Improved Procedural Safety During Facial Filler Treatments

“…Especially during initial learning phases, cognitive representation accrues more rapidly than muscle-specific representations which develop only after extensive practice. 72 Attempting injection procedures after online instruction only thus carries inherent risks. Considering the potentially grave sequelae of incorrect placement through minute variations in needle positioning, angulation and plunger control, it has never been more relevant to develop methods for gauging inherent hand skills.…”

Two Stages Outlier Removal as Pre-processing Digitizer Data on Fine Motor Skills (FMS) Classification Using Covariance Estimator and Isolation Forest

“…6, the classification method works better after the outlier handling was done by using the CEIF method. In data [38] which is squential EEG data, the classification process with the addition of CEIF method as outlier handling is higher than without applying outlier handling. The use of the CEIF method is more suitable for cursive handwriting data.…”

The Precision of the Human Hand: Variability in Pinch Strength and Manual Dexterity

“…These variables were age category, directional asymmetry (i.e., DA, handedness), anthropometric measurements (hand shape and thumb-index ratio) and, lifestyle factors (occupation, playing a musical instrument, playing sport). Kruskal-Wallis tests showed significant differences in pinch grip strength across age categories in males (χ 2 (2, n = 219) = 20.90, p < 0.0001, ε 2 = 0.9), with middle age (30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44) males being stronger than the younger (17-29) (Z = 4.53, n = 156, p < 0.0001) and the older (45+) (Z = 4.53, n = 132, p < 0.05) age categories. No significant differences were found for females (Figure 4).…”

“…Musical expertise requires highly refined motor abilities and hand function but most research on musicians has focused on neural plasticity rather than the form and function of the hand (e.g., [38,39]). The few studies investigating manual dexterity and hand strength in musicians have typically compared elite musicians to amateur or non-musicians (e.g., [40]).…”