Supplementary motor area contributes to carrying previous movement information over to current movement

Observing finger movement influences the stimulus-response process of the subsequent non-aiming finger movement

AIM

The present study investigated whether observing the finger movement influences the stimulus-response process of the subsequent non-aiming finger movement.

METHODS

Participants directed their eyes to the finger. Three auditory cues with 3 s intervals were provided in each trial. The participants abducted and adducted the index finger in response to the second and third cues; the first response was considered to be the previous response and the second response was considered to be the subsequent response. The time taken for the stimulus-response process was measured via reaction time. Vision was allowed from 0 to 1 s after the start cue of the previous response, after the cue of the subsequent response, or after the cues of the previous and subsequent responses.

RESULTS

Online visual information of the stationary finger accelerated the stimulus-response process of the non-aiming finger movement. The acceleration of the stimulus-response process induced by online visual information of the stationary finger was cancelled out by the previous response information, but this cancellation is itself then eliminated by the visual information from the previous response. The visual information from the previous response decelerated the stimulus-response process of the subsequent non-aiming movement, but this deceleration was then itself cancelled out by visual information of the stationary finger immediately before the subsequent non-aiming movement.

CONCLUSION

Taken together, information regarding the previous response functions as noise interfering with the processes contributing to the subsequent non-aiming movement.

Decay of Short-Term Motor Memory Regarding Force Reproduction

This study investigated the process that contributes to the decay of short-term motor memory regarding force reproduction. Participants performed tonic flexion of the right index finger with the target force feedback (criterion phase) and reproduced this force level without feedback 3, 10, 30, or 60 s after the end of the criterion phase (recall phase). The constant error for force reproduction was significantly greater than zero, indicating that information about the somatosensation and/or motor command in the criterion phase is positively biased. Constant and absolute errors were not influenced by the retention interval, indicating that neither bias nor error represents the decay of short-term motor memory over time. Variable error, defined as SD of bias (force in the recall phase minus that in the criterion phase), increased as the retention interval increased. This indicates that the decay of short-term motor memory is represented by the increase in inconsistency of memory bias among the trials. The correlation coefficient of the force between the criterion and recall phases with 3-s retention interval was greater than that with longer intervals. This is explained by the view that the contribution of the information of the practiced force to the force reproduction process is great within 3 s after the end of the practice, but the additional contribution of the noise information becomes greater after this time, causing lesser relative contribution of the information of the practiced force to the force reproduction process.

Influence of the Inter-Trial Interval, Movement Observation, and Hand Dominance on the Previous Trial Effect

Previous studies have shown that current movement is influenced by the previous movement, which is known as the previous trial effect. In this study, we investigated the influence of the inter-trial interval, movement observation, and hand dominance on the previous trial effect of the non-target discrete movement. Right-handed healthy humans abducted the index finger in response to a start cue, and this task was repeated with constant inter-trial intervals. The absolute difference in the reaction time (RT) between the previous and current trials increased as the inter-trial interval increased. The absolute difference in RT reflects the reproducibility of the time taken for the motor execution between two consecutive trials. Thus, the finding supported the view that there is a carryover of movement information from one trial to the next, and that the underlying reproducibility of the RT between the two consecutive trials decays over time. This carryover of movement information is presumably conveyed by implicit short-term memory, which also decays within a short period of time. The correlation coefficient of the RT between the previous and current trials decreased with an increase in the inter-trial interval, indicating that the common responsiveness of two consecutive trials weakens over time. The absolute difference was smaller when the response was performed while observing finger movement, indicating that a carryover of the visual information to the next trial enhances the reproducibility of the motor execution process between consecutive trials. Hand dominance did not influence the absolute difference or correlation coefficient, indicating that the central process mediating previous trial effect of hand movement is not greatly lateralized.