Dissociating Arbitrary Stimulus-Response Mapping from Movement Planning during Preparatory Period: Evidence from Event-Related Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study, we aimed to dissociate the neural correlates of two subprocesses involved in the preparatory period in the context of arbitrary, prelearned stimulus-response (S-R) associations, namely, S-R mapping and movement planning (MP). We teased apart these two subprocesses by comparing three tasks in which the complexity of both S-R mapping and MP were independently manipulated: simple reaction time (SRT) task, go/no-go reaction time (GNGRT) task, and choice reaction time (CRT) task. We found that a more complex S-R mapping, which is the common element differentiating CRT and GNGRT from SRT, was associated with higher brain activation in the left superior parietal lobe (SPL). Conversely, a greater number of planned finger movements, which is the common difference between CRT and both SRT and GNGRT, was associated with higher brain activation in a number of frontal areas, including the left supplementary motor area (SMA), left dorsal premotor cortex (dPM), and left anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). The left-hemisphere dominance for S-R mapping could be related to the fact that arbitrary S-R mapping is often verbally mediated in humans. Overall, these results suggest a clear dissociation in the preparatory-set period between the more abstract role of left SPL in activating the appropriate S-R associations and the more concrete role played by the SMA, dPM, and ACC in preparing the required motor programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".