English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We asked the question, does motor simulation (via imagery) and planning with execution have similar intentional characteristics? And, does use of a tool compared to arm reaching influence a different intention effect? We instructed participants to use motor imagery to estimate distance reachability with the hand (arm extended) and a 20-cm tool using a NOGO/GO intention paradigm. That is, use of imagery only and imagery with actual execution (IE). Results indicated no differences in accuracy within or between HAND and TOOL conditions. That is, there was no observable intentional effect. These findings lend preliminary support to an increasing body of evidence suggesting that the neurocognitive processes (in this case, intention) driving motor imagery and executed actions are similar for hand and tool use.

Are Intentional Processes with Tool Use Similar for Simulated and Executed Actions?