What you see is what you get: motor resonance in peripheral vision

Abstract

The first aim of this event---related fMRI study was to identify the neural circuits involved in imitation learning. We used a rapid imitation task where participants directly imitated pictures of guitar chords. The results provide clear evidence for the involvement of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, as well as the fronto---parietal mirror circuit (FPMC) during action imitation when the requirements for working memory are low. Connectivity analyses further indicated a robust connectivity between left prefrontal cortex and the components of the FPMC bilaterally. We conclude that a mechanism of automatic perception---action matching alone is insufficient to account for imitation learning. Rather, the motor representation of an observed, complex action, as provided by the FPMC, only serves as the 'raw material' for higher---order supervisory and monitoring operations associated with the prefrontal cortex. The second aim of this study was to assess whether these neural circuits are also recruited during observational practice (OP, without motor execution), or only during physical practice (PP). Whereas prefrontal cortex was not consistently activated in action observation across all participants, prefrontal activation intensities did predict the behavioural practice effects, thus indicating a crucial role of prefrontal cortex also in OP. In addition, whilst OP and PP produced similar activation intensities in the FPMC when assessed during action observation, during imitative execution, the practice---related activation decreases were significantly more pronounced for PP than for OP. This dissociation indicates a lack of execution---related resources in observationally practised actions. More specifically, we found neural efficiency effects in the right motor cingulate-basal ganglia circuit and the FPMC that were only observed after PP but not after OP. Finally, we confirmed that practice generally induced activation decreases in the FPMC during both action observation and imitation sessions and outline a framework explaining the discrepant findings in the literature.

Motor activation is modulated by visual experience during cyclic gait observation: A transcranial magnetic stimulation study

“…Thus, one possible reason for the small effect size may be the variation in observation sites and methods that observers used during gait observation. In support of this speculation, several recent TMS studies demonstrated that directing an observer's visual attention to a fixed part of an observed movement or action-relevant object enhances corticospinal excitability during the observation of thumb abduction/adduction movements [59] and hand grasping actions [60][61][62]. Given these definite effects of an observer's overt attention on motor resonance, it can be assumed that the results obtained in this study were also substantially affected by the participants' attention.…”

Attentive Observation Is Essential for the Misattribution of Agency to Self-Performance

“…Schain et al’s (2012) findings may be due to the use of a unique stimulus of the face as a distractor. In accordance with Leonetti et al (2015), MNS activation is enhanced by peripheral vision. In other words, OI should occur in a situation where the observer’s attention is not directed to an action itself (i.e., the inattentive observation condition).…”

“…On the other hand, it is possible to form a different interpretation. Given that motor resonance is thought to reflect MNS activation to facilitate in peripheral vision (Leonetti et al, 2015), and that there may be a higher cognitive mechanism for self-other distinction controlling our self-agency judgment (Brass et al, 2009), our result might be explained by another mechanism [i.e., the agency-judgment mechanism including TPJ suggested by Brass et al (2009)] even though MNS is actually activated in the inattentive condition. However, our study did not directly modulate and measure MNS, so it cannot be mentioned properly.…”

“…Considering the studies on MNS, which demonstrated the enhancement of MNS activations when participants observed target action attentively (Muthukumaraswamy and Singh, 2008), attention to action could facilitate “like me” judgment even if it was a misattribution; therefore, greater OI might arise. However, it cannot be said that the MNS activity declined in the inattentive observation condition per the evidence on motor resonance indicating that peripheral vision facilitates the activation of motor resonance, which are supported by MNS activity (Leonetti et al, 2015). Given the circumstances, conversely, another possibility is considered: higher-order cognitive control.…”

Overt orienting of spatial attention and corticospinal excitability during action observation are unrelated

“…Also magnetoencephalic (MEG) response to point-light biological motion displays, although largely independent of attention, seems to reflect further processing when stimuli are attended [28]. In neurophysiological terms, Leonetti and colleagues [35] asked participants to gaze upon a fixation point while covertly attending to an action sequence, in order to test whether presenting an action in peripheral vision could differently modulate motor excitability. The results showed that, even if the action viewed in peripheral vision—and then covertly attended—was effective in modulating the excitability of motor pathways, the accuracy of the motor response was low and rough.…”