Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Jan 12;12(1):e0169700.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169700. eCollection 2017.

Understanding the Goals of Everyday Instrumental Actions Is Primarily Linked to Object, Not Motor-Kinematic, Information: Evidence from fMRI

Affiliations

Understanding the Goals of Everyday Instrumental Actions Is Primarily Linked to Object, Not Motor-Kinematic, Information: Evidence from fMRI

Toby Nicholson et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Prior research conceptualised action understanding primarily as a kinematic matching of observed actions to own motor representations but has ignored the role of object information. The current study utilized fMRI to identify (a) regions uniquely involved in encoding the goal of others' actions, and (b) to test whether these goal understanding processes draw more strongly on regions involved in encoding object semantics or movement kinematics. Participants watched sequences of instrumental actions while attending to either the actions' goal (goal task), the movements performed (movement task) or the objects used (object task). The results confirmed, first, a unique role of the inferior frontal gyrus, middle temporal gyrus and medial frontal gyrus in action goal understanding. Second, they show for the first time that activation in the goal task overlaps directly with object- but not movement-related activation. Moreover, subsequent parametric analyses revealed that movement-related regions become activated only when goals are unclear, or observers have little action experience. In contrast to motor theories of action understanding, these data suggest that objects-rather than movement kinematics-carry the key information about others' actions. Kinematic information is additionally recruited when goals are ambiguous or unfamiliar.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Behavioural task.
Figure 1 presents a schematic image of the behavioural task. The left hand side of the image illustrates the (fully counterbalanced) sequence of the mini-blocks/tasks across a run (passive viewing baseline, object task, movement task and goal task). On the right, an example of an experimental mini block for each condition is depicted. Note that the image with a red border within each mini-block illustrates a repetition for that condition (e.g. a repeated object, movement or goal).
Fig 2
Fig 2. Unique goal activations & pairwise comparisons of goal, movement and object tasks.
Panel A shows unique activation in the goal task (green), as well as activation shared between goal task and object task (blue). No activations were shared with the movement task. Panel B to D show pairwise comparisons of the three tasks. Panel B: Object task (blue) vs. Movement task (red). Panel C: Goal task (green) vs. Movement task (red). Panel D: Goal task (green) vs. Object task (blue). All activations thresholded at p < 0.005 and whole-brain corrected to a familywise error p < 0.05.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Parametric activations.
Shows brain regions showing associations with the participants’ subjective action ratings. Top panel: negative associations with the apparentness of the action goals. Lower panel: negative associations with the amount of prior sensorimotor experience with the actions. All activations thresholded at p < 0.005 and whole-brain corrected to a familywise error p < 0.05.
Fig 4
Fig 4. A simple model of everyday action understanding.
Potential goals are initially identified on the basis of object information in inferior frontal and middle temporal areas (Step 1). Parietal-premotor motor-representation regions verify this initial interpretation or provide additional information (Step 2). If a goal is identified, associated mental states can in turn become activated—via medial prefrontal areas—and integrated with the situational context or prior knowledge about the person (Step 3).

References

    1. Bach P, Bayliss AP, Tipper SP. The predictive mirror: interactions of mirror and affordance processes during action observation. Psychonomic bulletin & review. 2011. February 1;18(1):171–6. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hamilton AF. Research review: Goals, intentions and mental states: Challenges for theories of autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2009. August 1;50(8):881–92. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02098.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Knoblich G, Sebanz N. The social nature of perception and action. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2006. June 1;15(3):99–104.
    1. Fogassi L, Ferrari PF, Gesierich B, Rozzi S, Chersi F, Rizzolatti G. Parietal lobe: from action organization to intention understanding. Science. 2005. April 29;308(5722):662–7. 10.1126/science.1106138 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Di Pellegrino G, Fadiga L, Fogassi L, Gallese V, Rizzolatti G. Understanding motor events: a neurophysiological study. Experimental brain research. 1992. October 1;91(1):176–80. - PubMed