Search

Observing and voluntarily imitating the biological kinematics displayed by a model underpins the acquisition of new motor skills via sensorimotor processes linking perception with action. Differences in voluntary imitation in autism could be related to sensorimotor processing activity during action‐observation of biological motion, as well as how sensorimotor integration processing occurs across imitation attempts. Using an observational practice protocol, which minimized the active contribution of the peripheral sensorimotor system, we examined the contribution of sensorimotor processing during action‐observation. The data showed that autistic participants imitated both the temporal duration and atypical kinematic profile of the observed movement with a similar level of accuracy as neurotypical participants. These findings suggest the lower‐level perception‐action processes responsible for encoding biological kinematics during the action‐observation phase of imitation are operational in autism. As there was no task‐specific engagement of the peripheral sensorimotor system during observational practice, imitation difficulties in autism are most likely underpinned by sensorimotor integration issues related to the processing of efferent and (re)afferent sensorimotor information during trial‐to‐trial motor execution. Lay Summary: Learning a skill by imitating a model (i.e., teacher, parent, or carer) occurs in many everyday situations such as a classroom or home. Imitation can be difficult for some autistic people, especially if a skill is new or complex. These difficulties are said to be based on how autistic people watch a skill and subsequently process what they watched in order to imitate the skill. In this study, we tasked autistic people to learn a new skill by only watching (not imitating) a model during a period of practice. Autistic people imitated how the model moved (movement time and style) similarly to non‐autistic people. This finding is very important because it showed that the reported difficulty in imitation is not based on how autistic people watch and process a model (i.e., how they move), but a result of sensory‐motor difficulties related to how they plan and get ready to imitate a model. Parents/carers, clinicians, teachers, and/or support workers should therefore consider autistic motor difficulties when teaching new motor skills and everyday skills via modeling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the kinesthetic exchanges between camera operators and dancers, and proposes that their creative methodologies and interpersonal relationships can enhance the making of a screendance. I discuss how I discovered this project, unpack the phrase “kinesthetic exchange,” and identify the cinematographer as the co-creator of a film’s kinesthesia. I also discuss screendances that prioritize mobile camera operation, and I speculate that shared kinesthesia between camera and dancer has the potential to kinesthetically and emotionally affect audiences. Included are six interviews of contemporary dance makers and filmmakers that speak to the kinesthetic connection between the dancer and camera operator, and how that relationship enlivens the two-dimensionality of the frame. It is my intention to offer varying perspectives about kinesthetic exchanges between camera operators and dancers, and how their relationships may influence the creative processes for the creation of screendances.

The Since autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurological and developmental disorder that is considered a major emerging public health issue, this study investigated the effect of observational practice on visual search behaviour, quiet eye and motor performance in overarm throwing skills in children with and without ASD. Children aged 7-10 years with and without ASD were matched for gender and randomly assigned into an experimental group (EG) with children with ASD (n=10; 8 boys and 2 girls), control group (CG) with children with ASD (n=10; 7 boys and 3 girls); EG with children without ASD (n=10; 7 boys and 3 girls) or CG with children without ASD (n=10; 7 boys and 3 girls). While all groups were homogenous at pre-test, results indicated that both EGs that performed visual exercises were found to have significant (p<0.05) improvements in throwing accuracy, visual search behaviour and duration of quiet eye. No such improvements were found in both CGs at the conclusion of the study. Visual exercises could be a useful tool to improve motor learning in children with ASD in school- and physical therapy settings, and may be used to improve speech/language skills, and social communication skills in children with ASD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During her 17 months of fieldwork (1972-74) in the village of Palimbei in Papua New Guinea, the Swiss anthropologist Florence Weiss took 5 674 black and white negatives and 4 794 col-our transparencies. Although the photographs were not taken at regular intervals, the average number of approximately 19 photographs per day gives an idea of the presence of photography in her fieldwork practice. Yet, Florence Weiss was not considered – or considered herself – a visual anthropologist. So, what kind of practice does her photography represent, and what role did it play in her wider fieldwork practice?

An experiment was conducted to examine the development of a movement sequence representation and the role of eye-movements during observational and physical practice. The task was to reproduce a 1300 ms spatial-temporal pattern of a sequence of elbow flexions and extensions. An inter-manual transfer design with a retention and two effector transfer tests (contralateral limb) was used. The mirror transfer test required the same pattern of homologous muscle activation and a sequence of joint angles as experienced during the acquisition phase, and the non-mirror transfer test required the same visual-spatial pattern as performed or observed during acquisition. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups differing in eye-movements (free to use their eyes vs. instruction to fixate) and the practice type (observational practice vs. physical practice). The results indicated that permitting to use eye-movements facilitates sequence learning. This advantage was found on both practice types. The results of the transfer tests indicated that participants of the physical practice group who were permitted to use their eyes demonstrated superior transfer performance in the mirror transfer test, while participants in the observational practice group demonstrated better performance on the non-mirror transfer test. These findings indicated that eye-movements enhanced the development of a visual-spatial representation during observational practice as well as a motor representation during physical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cognitive teaching methods facilitate the acquisition of motor skills; among these methods, the combination of physical, observational and imagery exercises has been the focus of recent investigations. The aim of this study was to investigate the facilitative effect of the combination of physical, observational and imagery exercises on immediate and delay retention of badminton high serve. The statistical population consisted of all male Razi University students. 84 students (mean age of 20.42+1.4 yr and score of imagery ability of 48.69+6.19) voluntarily participated in this study. Pretest included immediate and delay retention of badminton high serve using Scott and Fox test. Then, participants were assigned to homogenous groups according to their pretest (each group 12 participants): physical, observation, imagery, physical-observation, physical-imagery, observation-imagery, and physical-observation-imagery. Participants accomplished three sessions of 90 trials of badminton high serve. At the end of the final training session, an immediate test of retention was administered followed by a test of delay retention after 48 hours. One-way ANOVA test indicated that in both immediate and delay retention, the physical-observation-imagery group and the physical group significantly performed high serve better than other groups (p

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of observing point-light and video models and physical practice on learning a crouch start. Method: Thirty-two female students were randomly assigned into point-light, video, physical practice, and control groups. They performed 10 trials in pretest, 160 trials in acquisition phase, and 10 trials in 24-hour retention test. Kinematic features and reaction time were measured as dependent variables. Results: Results showed that physical practice group performed better than other groups in reaction time and range of motion of trunk and observational groups performed better than control groups in reaction time and range of motion of knee. Conclusion: The results confirm the positive effects of observational practice on motor learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent studies show that participants can engage in motor imagery (MI) and action observation (AO) simultaneously (AO+MI), indicating a capacity for dual action simulation. Here we studied the electrophysiological correlates and behavioural outcomes of two forms of AO+MI, along with pure MI and pure AO control conditions. In synchronised AO+MI, participants imagined performing a rhythmical action in synchrony with an observed distractor action. In contrast in static AO+MI, where the imagery served to conflict with AO, participants imagined holding a static hand posture during AO. Following synchronised AO+MI, rhythmical execution was strongly biased toward the cycle time of the previously observed rhythm ('imitation bias'), whereas a weaker bias was found following pure MI, and particularly for static AO+MI. In line with these findings, event-related desynchronisation (ERD) in primary sensorimotor and parietal regions was more pronounced in synchronised AO+MI compared to both pure AO and pure MI. These ERD amplitudes were, however, highly similar for static and synchronised AO+MI; suggesting that, regardless of co-represented content, both AO+MI states produced stronger motor activations than single action simulation. In contrast, synchronised AO+MI produced significantly stronger ERD in rostral prefrontal cortex compared to the other three conditions. This specific rostral prefrontal involvement most likely reflected additional cognitive processing for aligning dual action simulations. Together these results provide an important empirical validation of different AO+MI states, in that the imitation bias was strongly modulated by the content of the AO+MI instructions, and that synchronised AO+MI produced stronger behavioural and neurophysiological effects compared to pure AO or MI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fundamental to performing actions is the acquisition of motor behaviours. We examined if motor learning, through observational practice, occurs by viewing an agent displaying naturalistic or constant velocity, and whether motion trajectory, as opposed to end-state, information is required. We also investigated if observational practice is sensitive to belief regarding the origin of an agent. Participants had to learn a novel movement sequence timing task, which required upper-limb movements to a series of targets within a pre-specified absolute and relative time goal. Experiment 1 showed learning after viewing naturalistic and constant velocity, but not end-state information. For Experiment 2, in addition to learning the movement sequence, participants observed a series of movement stimuli that were either the trained or new sequences and asked to rate their confidence on whether the observed sequence was the same or different to observational practice. The results indicated that agency belief modulates how naturalistic and constant velocity is coded. This indicated that the processes associated with belief are part of an interpretative predictive coding system where the association between belief and observed motion is determined. When motion is constant velocity, or believed to be computer-generated, coding occurs through top-down processes. When motion is naturalistic velocity, and believed to be human-generated, it is most likely coded by gaining access to bottom-up sensorimotor processes in the action-observation network. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The acquisition of sensorimotor parameters that control goal-directed motor behaviors occurs by observing another person in the absence of efferent and afferent motor signals. This is observational practice. During such observation, biological motion properties associated with the observed person are coded into a representation that controls motor learning. Understanding the underlying processes, specifically associated with coding biological motion, has theoretical and practical significance. Here, we examined the following questions. Experiment 1: Are the underlying velocity characteristics associated with observed biological motion kinematics imitated? Experiment 2: Is attention involved in imitating biological motion kinematics? Experiment 3: Can selective attention modulate how biological motion kinematics are imitated/represented? To this end, participants practiced by observing a model performing a movement sequence that contained typical or atypical biological motion kinematics. The differences in kinematics were designed to dissociate the movement constraints of the task and the anatomical constraints of the observer. This way, we examined whether novel motor behaviors are acquired by adopting prototypical movements or coding biological motion. The kinematic analyses indicated the timing and spatial position of peak velocity were represented. Using a dual-task protocol, we attenuated the coding of biological motion kinematics (Experiment 2) and augmented coding using a selective attention protocol (Experiment 3). Findings indicated that velocity characteristics of biological motion kinematics are coded during observational practice, most likely through bottom-up sensorimotor processes. By modulating motion coding using 2 attentional protocols, we showed that bottom-up processes are influenced by input modulation, which is consistent with top-down control during observational practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the last 20 years, the topics of action observation (AO) and motor imagery (MI) have been largely studied in isolation from each other, despite the early integrative account by Jeannerod (1994, 2001). Recent neuroimaging studies demonstrate enhanced cortical activity when AO and MI are performed concurrently ("AO+MI"), compared to either AO or MI performed in isolation. These results indicate the potentially beneficial effects of AO+MI, and they also demonstrate that the underlying neurocognitive processes are partly shared. We separately review the evidence for MI and AO as forms of motor simulation, and present two quantitative literature analyses that indeed indicate rather little overlap between the two bodies of research. We then propose a spectrum of concurrent AO+MI states, from congruent AO+MI where the contents of AO and MI widely overlap, over coordinative AO+MI, where observed and imagined action are different but can be coordinated with each other, to cases of conflicting AO+MI. We believe that an integrative account of AO and MI is theoretically attractive, that it should generate novel experimental approaches, and that it can also stimulate a wide range of applications in sport, occupational therapy, and neurorehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This experiment examined whether visual online control processes are coded during observational practice. Participants physically practised an aiming sequence while yoked participants either observed (observational practice) or did nothing (control). Two target sizes were used to vary the importance of visual online control processes. Constant error and variable error indicated that participants acquired the timing constraints through physical practice and observational practice. Kinematic data confirmed that the physical practice and observational practice groups executed similar movement control. Physical practice did result in a performance advantage, but only under large target conditions. These findings indicate that visual online control processes can be effectively acquired through observational practice. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Based on social cognitive theory, we tested the effects of model type (mastery vs. coping) and form of practice (physical, imagery, or none) on performance expectations (self-efficacy and perceived task difficulty) and balance on a stabilometer task. After obtaining baseline measures, 78 participants viewed either mastery or coping demonstrations of the task and practiced according to their allocated condition for 3 minutes. Following practice, all measures were assessed for a second time. Physical practice improved actual performance more than imagery and no practice. In support of social cognitive theory, physical and imagery practice raised self-efficacy beliefs, but only physical practice made the task seem easier to perform. Model type did not influence performance. We show that inflated estimates of physical ability following imagery, which are discordant with one's actual ability (estimation inflation), are not based on false perceptions of task difficulty. Our data concur with other studies that report no advantage of using a coping model over a mastery model when improving performance of a novel motor task. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

We tested whether observational practice would elicit after-effects in a normal environment following observation of an actor performing in a perturbed visuomotor environment. Two actor groups (with and without vision of the hand) practised reaching to visual targets with the cursor rotated 30° to the actual hand movement. An observer group viewed this adaptation. Observers demonstrated significant learning when they subsequently performed the aiming task in the perturbed environment. However, different from both actor groups, observers did not show after-effects in the normal visuomotor condition. Our findings imply that there is a qualitative difference in the processes between observational and physical practice and suggest that physical exposure is required to update an internal model of the visuomotor environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The present experiment examined learning of a three-segment movement sequence using physical or observational practice, and whether permitting eye movements to be made during observation is a prerequisite for learning such a movement sequence. Specifically, participants were required to move a mouse cursor through a three-segment movement sequence in order to satisfy one of three movement time goals (800, 1000, 1200ms). A yoked-participant design was used in which a physical practice group acted as a learning model, which was viewed simultaneously by two groups that carried out different observational practice procedures. An observation group was permitted to move their eyes whilst observing the model, whereas the fixation group was instructed to maintain fixation on a central target. The difference between pre-test and post-test data indicated that all the three experimental groups significantly altered their timing accuracy, variability and movement kinematics over practice, while the control group’s behaviour was unchanged. These data indicate that movement time as well as the underlying movement control was learned following observation of a movement with or without an explicit contribution from eye movements, albeit to a lesser extent during the final segment of the sequence when compared to the physical practice group. The implication is that while similar processes might normally be involved in physical and observational practice, information afforded by eye movements during observation (e.g., efference copy and eye proprioception) is not necessary for movement sequence learning. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Neurophysiological and behavioural research has linked observational practice (OP) to a mirroring mechanism encompassing the action-observation network (AON). Although, the original findings indicate that biological stimuli alone activate the AON, recent evidence has shown sensitivity to non-biological stimuli. Thus, the AON is suggested to be influenced by interacting bottom-up and top-down processes. In this review, we describe the multi-functional properties of the AON and discuss the implications for OP and subsequent motor learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]