MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405221719 · doi:10.1162/imag_a_00419

Action observation and imitation: Corticospinal responses and hemispheric dominance

2024· article· en· W4405221719 on OpenAlexafffund
Niloufaralsadat Hashemi, Tom Chau, Deryk S. Beal

Bibliographic record

VenueImaging Neuroscience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital Foundation
KeywordsDominance (genetics)ImitationNeurosciencePsychologyAction (physics)Cognitive psychologyBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The response of the motor neuron system to the observation of lateralized movements and expectation mismatches remains elusive. We investigated how observation of hand movement modulates corticospinal excitability as measured by motor evoked potentials to single pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Twenty-seven adults watched a series of egocentric video recordings of hands, with one hand either squeezing a foam ball as expected or both hands remaining stationary. Task conditions comprised observation-only and observation with synchronous imitation of the depicted motor action. Single TMS pulses were delivered to the motor cortex contralateral to the dominant hand at the video frame of maximal hand closure for squeeze videos and randomly for no-squeeze videos (in both observation-only or observation with synchronous imitation). We analyzed MEPs, from the First Dorsal Interosseous (FDI) muscle of the dominant hand. Observation alone (absence of motor intention) did not enhance corticospinal excitability; however, when paired with imitation (presence of motor intention), it tended to increase MEP amplitudes, regardless of the attended side (dominant or non-dominant) or depicted action (squeeze or not). Among conditions in which the dominant hand remained stationary, MEP amplitudes were elevated (p = 0.004) in observation with imitation of non-dominant hand squeezing, suggesting hemispheric dominance in coordinating motor actions. Additionally, MEP latencies tended to decrease during synchronous imitation of squeeze videos. Our findings support the consideration of observation with synchronous imitation as a task for brain state-dependent brain stimulation protocols for optimizing neuromotor recovery.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImaging NeuroscienceSame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207