Effects of motor pacing on frontal‐hemodynamic responses during continuous upper‐limb and whole‐body movements

• Published in: Psychophysiology Vol. 60; no. 5; pp. e14226 - n/a
• Main Authors: Guérin, Ségolène M. R., Vincent, Marion A., Delevoye‐Turrell, Yvonne N.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.05.2023; Wiley
• Series: Psychophysiology
• Subjects: Behavior; Brain - physiology; Cognition; Cognitive ability; cognitive control; Cognitive science; ecological motor activity; fNIRS; Hemodynamics; Humans; Infrared spectroscopy; inhibition; Motor task performance; motor timing; sensorimotor synchronization; Sensorimotor system; Spectroscopy, Near-Infrared - methods; spontaneous pace; Synchronization; Upper Extremity; Walking - physiology; cognitive control; fNIRS; spontaneous pace; ecological motor activity; inhibition; sensorimotor synchronization; motor timing
• ISSN: 0048-5772; 1469-8986; 1540-5958
• DOI: 10.1111/psyp.14226

Advances in timing research advocate for the existence of two timing mechanisms (automatic vs. controlled) that are related to the level of cognitive control intervening for motor behavior regulation. In the present study, we used the functional near‐infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) cutting‐edge technique to examine the hypothesis that prefrontal inhibitory control is needed to perform slow motor activities. Participants were asked to perform a sensorimotor‐synchronization task at various paces (i.e., slow, close‐to‐spontaneous, fast). We contrasted upper‐limb circle drawing to a more naturalistic behavior that required whole‐body movements (i.e., steady‐state walking). Results indicated that whole‐body movements led to greater brain oxygenation over the motor regions when compared with upper‐limb activities. The effect of motor pace was found in the walking task only, with more bilateral orbitofrontal and left dorsolateral activation at slow versus fast pace. Exploratory analyses revealed a positive correlation between the activation of the orbitofrontal and motor areas for the close‐to‐spontaneous pace in both tasks. Overall, results support the key role of prefrontal cognitive control in the production of slow whole‐body movements. In addition, our findings confirm that upper‐limb (laboratory‐based) tasks might not be representative of those engaged during everyday‐life motor behaviors. The fNIRS technique may be a valuable tool to decipher the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying naturalistic, adaptive motor behaviors. Collectively, our findings argue against the existence of a fast vs. slow movement dichotomy in terms of brain mechanisms. Rather, they extend Buonomano's population‐clocks model by suggesting that motor timing is embedded within the motor cortex regardless of the time interval being performed. The prefrontal cortex may support the key role of motor inhibition to move slower than the spontaneous tempo.