Trial reportScientific reports2022
Shared mechanisms underlie mental imagery and motor planning.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tetrix: A novel Tetris-based paradigm for neuroimaging research and clinical applications.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Effects of orienteering exercise on spatial visualization ability in preschool children aged 4-5 years: Behavioral and fNIRS evidence.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- Cognitive Reserve as a Protective Factor for Visuospatial Ability in Healthy Aging.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Beta-band desynchronization in the human hippocampus during movement preparation in a delayed reach task.Experimental brain research · 2025Article
- Brain Activation During Motor Preparation and Execution in Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment: An fNIRS Study.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- How embodied is cognition? fMRI and behavioral evidence for common neural resources underlying motor planning and mental rotation of bodily stimuli.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many studies have associated mental imagery with motor control mechanisms by showing mutually active brain areas and functions, as well as similar temporal patterns of imagining and executing the same motor actions. One of the main conjectured mutual mechanisms is the Cerebellar forward-model, commonly believed to generate sensory predictions as part of both motor control and mental imagery processes. Nevertheless, trials to associate one's overall individual mental and motor capacities have shown only mild and inconsistent correlations, hence challenging the mutual mechanism assumption. We hypothesized that one cause to this inconsistency is the forward-model's dominance in the motor-planning stage only when adapting to novel sensorimotor environments, while the inverse-model is gradually taking the lead along the adaptation, and therefore biasing most attempts to measure motor-mental overlapping functions and correlate these measurements under regular circumstances. Our current study aimed to tackle and explore this gap using immersive virtual embodiment, by applying an experience of a fundamental sensorimotor conflict, thereby manipulating the sensory prediction mechanism, and presumably forcing an increased involvement of the forward-model in the motor planning stage throughout the experiment. In the study, two groups of subjects (n = 48) performed mental and manual rotation within an immersive, motion-captured, virtual reality environment, while the sensorimotor dynamics of only the test group were altered by physical-virtual speed re-mapping making the virtual hand move twice as fast as the physical hand controlling it. Individual mental imagery capacities were assessed before and after three blocks of manual-rotation, where motor planning durations were measured as the time until motion onset. The results show that virtual sensorimotor alteration extremely increases the correlation of mental imagery and motor planning (r = 0.9, p < .0001) and leads to higher mental imagery performance improvement following the physical blocks. We particularly show that virtual embodiment manipulation affects the motor planning stage to change and functionally overlap with imagery mechanisms, rather than the other way around, which supports our conjecture of an increased sensory-prediction forward-model involvement. Our results shed new light on the embodied nature of mental imagery, support the view of the predictive forward-model as a key mechanism mutually underlying motor control and imagery, and suggest virtual sensorimotor alteration as a novel methodology to increase physical-mental convergence. These findings also suggest the applicability of using existing motion-tracked virtual environments for continuous cognitive evaluation and treatment, through kinematic analysis of ongoing natural motor behaviors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.