Hand and Foot Selection in Mental Body Rotations Involves Motor-Cognitive Interactions

Abstract

Action imagery involves the mental representation of an action without overt execution, and can contribute to perspective taking, such as that required for left-right judgments in mental body rotation tasks. It has been shown that perspective (back view, front view), rotational angle (head-up, head-down), and abstractness (abstract, realistic) of the stimulus material influences speed and correctness of the judgement. The present studies investigated whether left-right judgements are more difficult on legs than on arms and whether the type of limb interacts with the other factors. Furthermore, a combined score for speed and accuracy was explored to eliminate possible tradeoffs and to obtain the best possible measure of subjects' individual ability. Study 1 revealed that the front view is more difficult than the back view because it involves a vertical rotation in perspective taking. Head-down rotations are more difficult than head-up rotations because they involve a horizontal rotation in perspective taking. Furthermore, leg stimuli are more difficult than hand stimuli, particularly in head-down rotations. In Study 2, these findings were replicated in abstract stimuli as well as in realistic stimuli. In addition, perspective taking for realistic stimuli in the back view is easier than realistic stimuli in the front view or abstract stimuli (in both perspectives). We conclude that realistic stimulus material facilitates task comprehension and amplifies the effects of perspective. By replicating previous findings, the linear speed-accuracy score was shown to be a valid measure to capture performance in mental body rotations.

Keywords: action imagery ability; mental action representations; motor imagery.

Figure 1

Depiction of the abstract stimuli in Study 1. (a) Back view of the left arm raised. (b) Front view of the right arm raised. (c) Back view of the left leg raised. (d) Front view of the right foot raised.

Figure 2

Boxplots of the linear integrated speed-accuracy scores (LISAS) depending on rotation (head-down, head-up), perspective (back view, front view), and limb (arm, leg) in Study 1.

Figure 3

Depiction of the realistic stimuli in Study 2. (a) Back view of the left arm raised. (b) Front view of the right arm raised. (c) Back view of the left leg raised. (d) Front view of the right foot raised.

Figure 4

Boxplots of the linear integrated speed-accuracy scores (LISAS) depending on perspective (front view, back view), rotation (head-up, head-down), abstractness (realistic, abstract), and limb (arm, leg) in Study 2.

Figure 5

Pearson correlations between self-efficacy (SE; [49]) vividness of external visual (EVI), internal visual (IVI), and kinesthetic (KIN) imagery [7] and linear integrated speed-accuracy scores depending on perspective (front view: FV, back view: BV), rotation (head-up: HU, head-down: HD), abstractness (realistic: R, abstract: A), and limb (arm, leg). Additionally, correlations of the difference score (DIFF) of each condition with the baseline (back view head-up) are shown. Larger and darker circles indicate larger correlations.