The lateralized effects of Parkinson’s Disease on motor imagery: Evidence from mental chronometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alterations to the content of action representations may contribute to the movement challenges that characterize Parkinson's Disease (PD). One way to investigate action representations is through motor imagery. As PD motor symptoms typically have a unilateral onset, disease-related deficits related to action representations may follow a similarly lateralized pattern. The present study examined if temporal accuracy of motor imagery in individuals with PD differed according to the side of the body involved in the task. Thirty-eight participants with PD completed a mental chronometry task using their more affected and less affected side. Participants had significantly shorter mental versus physical movement times for the more affected. Higher imagery vividness in the kinaesthetic domain predicted shorter mental versus physical movement times for the more affected side, as did lower imagery vividness in the visual domain and poorer cognitive function. These results indicate that people with PD imagine movements differently when the target actions their more affected versus less affected side. It is additionally possible that side-specific deficits in the accurate processing of kinaesthetic information lead to an increased reliance on visual processes and cognitive resources to successfully execute motor imagery involving the more affected side.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".