IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0093116.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Habitual vs Non-Habitual Manual Actions: An ERP Study on Overt Movement Execution

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Westerholz
  • Thomas Schack
  • Christoph Schütz
  • Dirk Koester

Abstract

This study explored the neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the planning and execution of an overt goal-related handle rotation task. More specifically, we studied the neural basis of motor actions concerning the influence of the grasp choice. The aim of the present study was to differentiate cerebral activity between grips executed in a habitual and a non-habitual mode, and between specified and free grip choices. To our knowledge, this is the first study to differentiate cerebral activity underlying overt goal-related actions executed with a focus on the habitual mode. In a handle rotation task, participants had to use thumb-toward (habitual) or thumb-away (non-habitual) grips to rotate a handle to a given target position. Reaction and reach times were shorter for the habitual compared to the non-habitual mode indicating that the habitual mode requires less cognitive processing effort than the non-habitual mode. Neural processes for action execution (measured by event-related potentials (ERPs)) differed between habitual and non-habitual conditions. We found differential activity between habitual and non-habitual conditions in left and right frontal areas from −600 to 200 ms time-locked to reaching the target position. No differential neural activity could be traced for the specification of the grip. The results suggested that the frontal negativity reflected increased difficulty in movement precision control in the non-habitual mode compared to the habitual mode during the homing in phase of grasp and rotation actions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Westerholz & Thomas Schack & Christoph Schütz & Dirk Koester, 2014. "Habitual vs Non-Habitual Manual Actions: An ERP Study on Overt Movement Execution," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-10, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0093116
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0093116
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0093116
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0093116&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0093116?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0093116. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.