Response-repetition effects depend on motor set: evidence for anatomical coding in response selection

Learning a covert sequence of effector movements: limits to its acquisition

Sequence learning in serial reaction time (SRT) tasks is an established, lab-based experimental paradigm to study acquisition and transfer of skills based on the detection of predictable regularities in stimulus and motor response sequences. Participants learn a sequence of targets and responses to these targets by associating the responses with subsequently presented targets. In the traditional paradigm, however, actions and response targets are directly related. In contrast, the present study asked whether participants would demonstrate acquisition of a sequence of effector movements of the left vs. right hand (e.g., hand sequence learning), whilst the actual targets and associated finger responses are unpredictable. Twenty-seven young adults performed a SRT task to visually presented characters with the index or middle fingers of both hands. While the specific fingers to respond with were randomly selected for each target presentation, both hands followed a covert sequence. We asked whether participants would learn the underlying hand sequence as demonstrated by shortened response latencies and increased accuracy compared to a fully randomized hand sequence. The results show sequence-specific learning effects. However, categorization of hand responses depending on the previous response suggested that learning occurred predominantly for subsequent finger responses of the same hand, which added to general hand-based priming. Nevertheless, a marginally significant effect was observed even for predictable shifts between hands when homologous fingers were involved. Our results thus suggest that humans are able to benefit from predictable within-hand finger shifts but less so for predicted shifts between hands.

The warning stimulus as retrieval cue: The role of associative memory in temporal preparation

In a warned reaction time task, the warning stimulus (S1) initiates a process of temporal preparation, which promotes a speeded response to the impending target stimulus (S2). According to the multiple trace theory of temporal preparation (MTP), participants learn the timing of S2 by storing a memory trace on each trial, which contains a temporal profile of the events on that trial. On each new trial, S1 serves as a retrieval cue that implicitly and associatively activates memory traces created on earlier trials, which jointly drive temporal preparation for S2. The idea that S1 assumes this role as a retrieval cue was tested across eight experiments, in which two different S1s were associated with two different distributions of S1-S2 intervals: one with predominantly short and one with predominantly long intervals. Experiments differed regarding the S1 features that made up a pair, ranging from highly distinct (e.g., tone and flash) to more similar (e.g., red and green flash) and verbal (i.e., "short" vs "long"). Exclusively for pairs of highly distinct S1s, the results showed that the S1 cue modified temporal preparation, even in participants who showed no awareness of the contingency. This cueing effect persisted in a subsequent transfer phase, in which the contingency between S1 and the timing of S2 was broken - a fact participants were informed of in advance. Together, these findings support the role of S1 as an implicit retrieval cue, consistent with MTP.

Proactive motor control within and between hands: Effects of age, motor set, and cue type

Several studies have reported that proactive motor control in a cued four-finger choice reaction task proceeds more efficiently with a 2-hands motor set (two fingers on each hand) than with a 1-hand motor set (four fingers on one hand). According to the Grouping Model, this is because the 2-hands motor set recruits distinct left and right hand representations located in separate cerebral hemispheres, whereas the 1-hand motor set recruits partially overlapping neural areas grouped together in one hemisphere. The latter neural organization increases neuromotor noise, thereby complicating proactive motor selection. The present study examined the effect of older age on the 2-hands motor selection advantage. A group of young and a group of older adults performed two proactive motor tasks-the procue task and the anticue task-with two motor sets: a 2-hands and 1-hand set. Predictive cues preceded the target signal at five different time intervals (100-850 ms), allowing advance selection of 2 out of 4 fingers. Older adults showed longer reaction times and smaller cueing benefits compared to younger adults. Overall, cueing benefits were greater, and accrued faster, with the 2-hands than with the 1-hand motor set, reflecting the beneficial impact of the neuroanatomical hand distinction. Importantly, the 2-hands advantage was substantially greater in the older age group, suggesting that the hand distinction might abate age-related neural dedifferentiation. These findings highlight the impact of cortical representational distinctiveness in proactive motor control, especially in older age.

Inhibitory mechanisms in motor imagery: disentangling different forms of inhibition using action mode switching

In motor imagery, probably several inhibitory mechanisms prevent actual movements: global inhibition, effector-specific inhibition, and inhibition retrieved during target processing. We investigated factors that may influence those mechanisms. In an action mode switching paradigm, participants imagined and executed movements from home buttons to target buttons. We analysed sequential effects. Activation (due to execution) or inhibition (due to imagination) in the previous trial should affect performance in the subsequent trial, enabling conclusions about inhibitory mechanisms in motor imagery. In Experiment 1, evidence for global and effector-specific inhibition was observed. Evidence for inhibition retrieved during target processing was inconclusive. Data patterns were similar when start and end of the imagined movements were indicated with an effector that was part of the imagined movement (hand) and with a different effector (feet). In Experiment 2, we ruled out that the use of biological stimuli (left/right hands in Experiment 1) to indicate the effector causes sequential effects attributed to effector-specific inhibition, by using uppercase letters (R, L). As in Experiment 1, evidence for effector-specific inhibition was observed. In conclusion, we could reliably disentangle several inhibitory mechanisms in motor imagery.

Inhibition in motor imagery: a novel action mode switching paradigm

Motor imagery requires that actual movements are prevented (i.e., inhibited) from execution. To investigate at what level inhibition takes place in motor imagery, we developed a novel action mode switching paradigm. Participants imagined (indicating only start and end) and executed movements from start buttons to target buttons, and we analyzed trial sequence effects. Trial sequences depended on current action mode (imagination or execution), previous action mode (pure blocks/same mode, mixed blocks/same mode, or mixed blocks/other mode), and movement sequence (action repetition, hand repetition, or hand alternation). Results provided evidence for global inhibition (indicated by switch benefits in execution-imagination (E-I)-sequences in comparison to I-I-sequences), effector-specific inhibition (indicated by hand repetition costs after an imagination trial), and target inhibition (indicated by target repetition benefits in I-I-sequences). No evidence for subthreshold motor activation or action-specific inhibition (inhibition of the movement of an effector to a specific target) was obtained. Two (global inhibition and effector-specific inhibition) of the three observed mechanisms are active inhibition mechanisms. In conclusion, motor imagery is not simply a weaker form of execution, which often is implied in views focusing on similarities between imagination and execution.

Motor Demands Constrain Cognitive Rule Structures

Study of human executive function focuses on our ability to represent cognitive rules independently of stimulus or response modality. However, recent findings suggest that executive functions cannot be modularized separately from perceptual and motor systems, and that they instead scaffold on top of motor action selection. Here we investigate whether patterns of motor demands influence how participants choose to implement abstract rule structures. In a learning task that requires integrating two stimulus dimensions for determining appropriate responses, subjects typically structure the problem hierarchically, using one dimension to cue the task-set and the other to cue the response given the task-set. However, the choice of which dimension to use at each level can be arbitrary. We hypothesized that the specific structure subjects adopt would be constrained by the motor patterns afforded within each rule. Across four independent data-sets, we show that subjects create rule structures that afford motor clustering, preferring structures in which adjacent motor actions are valid within each task-set. In a fifth data-set using instructed rules, this bias was strong enough to counteract the well-known task switch-cost when instructions were incongruent with motor clustering. Computational simulations confirm that observed biases can be explained by leveraging overlap in cortical motor representations to improve outcome prediction and hence infer the structure to be learned. These results highlight the importance of sensorimotor constraints in abstract rule formation and shed light on why humans have strong biases to invent structure even when it does not exist.