The PETTLEP Approach to Motor Imagery: A Functional Equivalence Model for Sport Psychologists

2001 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul S. Holmes ◽  
David J. Collins
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Glover ◽  
Elys Bibby ◽  
Elsa Tuomi

The Motor-Cognitive Model holds that motor imagery relies on executive resources to a much greater extent than do overt actions. According to this view, engaging executive resources with an interference task during motor imagery or overt actions will lead to a greater lengthening of the time required to imagine a movement than to execute it physically. This model is in contrast to a currently popular view, the Functional Equivalence Model, which holds that motor imagery and overt action use identical mental processes, and thus should be equally affected by task manipulations. The two competing frameworks were tested in three experiments that varied the amount and type of executive resources needed to perform an interference task concurrent with either an overt or imagined version of a grasping and placing action. In Experiment 1, performing a concurrent calculation task led to a greater lengthening of the time required to execute motor imagery than overt action relative to a control condition involving no interference task. Further, an increase in the number of responses used to index performance affected the timing of motor imagery but not overt actions. In Experiment 2, a low load repetition task interfered with the timing of motor imagery, but less so than a high load calculation task; both tasks had much smaller effects on overt actions. In Experiment 3, a word generation task also interfered with motor imagery much more than with overt actions. The results of these experiments provide broad support for the Motor-Cognitive Model over the Functional Equivalence Model in showing that interfering with executive functions had a much greater impact on the timing of motor imagery than on overt actions. The possible roles of different executive processes in motor imagery are discussed.


1994 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 212-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberta L. Klatzky

Jeannerod's target article describes support, through empirical and neurological findings, for the intriguing idea of motor imagery, a form of representation hypothesized to have levels of functional equivalence with motor preparation, while being consciously accessible. Jeannerod suggests that the subjectively accessible content of motor imagery allows it to be distinguished from motor preparation, which is unconscious. Motor imagery is distinguished from visual imagery in terms of content. Motor images are kinesthetic in nature; they are parametrized by variables such as force and time and they are potentially governed by kinematic rules. Jeannerod acknowledges, however, that motor and visual imagery may not easily be separated, because actions take place in a spatial environment. I agree; in fact, I suggest here that visualization may generally be concomitant with, and may even subjectively dominate, motor imagery.


2019 ◽  
Vol 136 ◽  
pp. 103598 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simona Ruggirello ◽  
Lisa Campioni ◽  
Samuele Piermanni ◽  
Laura Sebastiani ◽  
Enrica L. Santarcangelo

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yvonne Y Chen ◽  
Kathryn Lambert ◽  
Christopher R Madan ◽  
Anthony Singhal

AbstractMotor imagery, or our ability to imagine movement without actually engaging in the action, has been an increasingly popular tool in rehabilitation settings. Understanding its neural underpinning is crucial for further development of new interventions. Using scalp electroencephalography (EEG), many studies have shown that mu oscillations (8-13 Hz), a variant of the alpha band recorded over the motor cortex electrodes, are involved in both the imagination and performance of movements; however, the exact relationship between mu oscillations and motor imagery is unclear. To further our understanding of the functional significance of mu oscillations and their role in both motor learning and motor performance, our study sought to investigate how suppression in mu oscillations varies during a motor imagery task according to both within subject imagery success and between subject imagery ability. We examined EEG activity while a large sample of participants performed an objective test of motor imagery ability (Test of Ability in Movement Imagery, TAMI). Results demonstrated that mu oscillatory activity significantly decreased during successful imagery trials as compared to unsuccessful ones. However, the extent of reduction in mu oscillations did not correlate with individual imagery ability. These results provide further support for the involvement of mu oscillations in motor behaviours and indicate that suppression in mu oscillations may serve as an important index for determining successful motor imagery performance within an individual. The processes that underlie this success are likely similar to those that underlie successful motor execution, given motor imagery’s proposed functional equivalence to motor imagery.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Toovey ◽  
Ellen Seiss ◽  
Annette Sterr

Vividly imagining action is thought to be functionally equivalent with preparing to act. Although evidence has shown that imagination can prime subsequent action, this is also the defining feature of action preparation. Curiously, neither theory nor experiment have thus far examined to what extent functional equivalence between these phenomena also constitutes a computational equivalence. To test this hypothesis, a response precuing experiment was designed whereby real responses were primed either with relevant imagination or preparation of an action. The information content and validity of precues were manipulated, allowing us to evaluate the relative costly, beneficial, and total congruency effects of these two conditions on subsequent performance. In four experiments, we observed consistency between conditions in their effects on the patterns of response time costs and benefits, demonstrating empirical evidence in line with the functional equivalence hypothesis. Additionally, the strength of priming, measured as the total congruency effect, was consistently larger in the imagery condition. This observation was not dependent on temporal uncertainty (Experiment 2), was a general feature of the motor system (Experiment 3), and could not be explained as a function of cognitive load (Experiment 4). To our knowledge this is the first evidence of a reliable difference between motor imagery and motor preparation, and therefore provides a novel qualitative aspect to the functional equivalence hypothesis. The implications for existing and future theories and models of motor imagery are discussed, with particular focus on the potential value of predictive coding frameworks.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document