Observation and physical practice: Coding of simple motor sequences

Abstract

An experiment was conducted to determine the coordinate system used in the development of movement codes during observation and utilized on later physical practice performance of a simple spatial-temporal movement sequence. The task was to reproduce a 1.3-s spatial-temporal pattern of elbow flexions and extensions. An intermanual transfer paradigm with a retention test and two transfer tests was used: a mirror transfer test where the same pattern of muscle activation and limb joint angles was required and a nonmirror transfer test where the visual-spatial pattern of the sequence was reinstated on the transfer test. The results indicated a strong advantage for participants in the physical practice condition when transferred to the mirror condition in which the motor coordinates (e.g., pattern of muscle activation and joint angles) were reinstated relative to transfer performance when the visual-spatial coordinates were reinstated (visual and spatial location of the target waveform). The observation group, however, demonstrated an advantage when the visual-spatial coordinates were reinstated. These results demonstrate that codes based in motor coordinates can be developed relatively quickly for simple rapid movement sequences when participants are provided physical practice, but observational practice limits the system to the development of codes based in visual-spatial coordinates. Performances of control participants, who were not permitted to practise or observe the task, were quite poor on all tests.

In the absence of physical practice, observation and imagery do not result in updating of internal models for aiming

“…Similar conclusions about the limits of observational practice in encouraging motor-based representations have been made recently by authors studying sequencing learning (e.g. Boutin et al 2010;Gruetzmatcher et al 2011). …”

Long- and short-term plastic modeling of action prediction abilities in volleyball

“…In particular, observational practice might allow to develop a representation of the visuo-spatial coordinates of the action but not of its speciWc motor codes, in terms of joint angles and activation patterns (Gruetzmacher et al, 2011), which require direct motor experience. In keeping with a hierarchical model of human action understanding (Grafton & Hamilton, 2007), actions may be represented at diVerent levels of increasing abstraction, from action kinematics to the action goals or intentions, which may be underpinned by diVerent sectors of the fronto-parietal action observation network.…”

“…Interference with primary motor cortex activity disrupts the consolidation of motor memories acquired after physical (Muellbacher et al, 2002) and observational (Brown, Wilson, & Gribble, 2009) practice, thus suggesting that both types of training induce changes of movement representation in primary motor cortex (Censor & Cohen, 2011). Interestingly, several movement properties may be acquired during observational practice, including coordination patterns (Boutin, Fries, Panzer, Shea, & Blandin, 2010;Gruetzmacher, Panzer, Blandin, & Shea, 2011;Heyes & Foster, 2002;Vinter & Perruchet, 2002), timing (Hayes, Timmis, & Bennett, 2009;Hayes, Elliott, & Bennett, 2010;Ong & Hodges, 2010) and force scaling (Mattar & Gribble, 2005;Porro, Facchin, Fusi, Dri, & Fadiga, 2007). Furthermore, like for physical training, the observationrelated improvements in a speciWc motor task can be transferred to a diVerent one (Buchanan & Wright, 2011;Gruetzmacher et al, 2011;Hayes et al, 2010;Mattar & Gribble, 2005;Ong & Hodges, 2010;Shea, Wright, Wulf, & Whitacre, 2000).…”

“…Advantages of physical practice, for example, transfer to motor tasks with analogous motor coordinates (i.e., using the opposite limb to control the same pattern of muscle contractions and joint angles). In contrast, advantages of observational practice transfer to tasks with diVerent motor coordinates but analogous visuo-spatial coordinates (i.e., using the opposite limb to control movements with the same direction in the external space) (Gruetzmacher et al, 2011). Moreover, unlike execution, observation of visuo-motor adaptation to reaching movements in a perturbed environment did not induce any after-eVects (i.e.…”

“…Interestingly, several movement properties may be acquired during observational practice, including coordination patterns (Boutin, Fries, Panzer, Shea, & Blandin, 2010;Gruetzmacher, Panzer, Blandin, & Shea, 2011;Heyes & Foster, 2002;Vinter & Perruchet, 2002), timing (Hayes, Timmis, & Bennett, 2009;Hayes, Elliott, & Bennett, 2010;Ong & Hodges, 2010) and force scaling (Mattar & Gribble, 2005;Porro, Facchin, Fusi, Dri, & Fadiga, 2007). Furthermore, like for physical training, the observationrelated improvements in a speciWc motor task can be transferred to a diVerent one (Buchanan & Wright, 2011;Gruetzmacher et al, 2011;Hayes et al, 2010;Mattar & Gribble, 2005;Ong & Hodges, 2010;Shea, Wright, Wulf, & Whitacre, 2000). Importantly, however, motor skill acquisition is not identical when mediated by physical or observational practice, as suggested by the Wnding that their combination resulted in a greater advantage on transfer tasks (Shea et al, 2000).…”