» Articles » PMID: 30462721

Do Musicians Learn a Fine Sequential Hand Motor Skill Differently Than Non-musicians?

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2018 Nov 22
PMID 30462721
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Do professional musicians learn a fine sequential hand motor skill more efficiently than non-musicians? Is this also the case when they perform motor imagery, which implies that they only mentally simulate these movements? Musicians and non-musicians performed a Go/NoGo discrete sequence production (DSP) task, which allows to separate sequence-specific from a-specific learning effects. In this task five stimuli, to be memorized during a preparation interval, signaled a response sequence. In a practice phase, different response sequences had to be either executed, imagined, or inhibited, which was indicated by different response cues. In a test phase, responses were required to familiar (previously executed, imagined, or inhibited) and unfamiliar sequences. In both phases, response times and response accuracy were measured while the electroencephalogram (EEG) was only registered during the practice phase to compare activity between motor imagery, motor execution, and motor inhibition for both groups. Results in the practice phase revealed that musicians learned the response sequences faster and more accurately than non-musicians although no difference in initiation time was found. EEG analyses revealed similar lateralized activity during learning a motor skill for both groups. Our results from the test phase showed better sequence-a-specific learning effects (i.e., faster response times and increased accuracy) for musicians than for non-musicians. Moreover, we revealed that non-musicians benefit more from physical execution while learning a required motor sequence, whereas sequence-specific learning effects due to learning with motor imagery were very similar for musicians and non-musicians.

Citing Articles

Interactive influences of prior knowledge on episodic memory.

Wing E, Gilboa A, Ryan J iScience. 2024; 27(11):111142.

PMID: 39524357 PMC: 11546434. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.111142.


C-SMB 2.0: Integrating over 25 years of motor sequencing research with the Discrete Sequence Production task.

Verwey W Psychon Bull Rev. 2023; 31(3):931-978.

PMID: 37848660 PMC: 11192694. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-023-02377-0.


Functional near-infrared spectroscopy during motor imagery and motor execution in healthy adults.

Zou Y, Li J, Fan Y, Zhang C, Kong Y Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2022; 47(7):920-927.

PMID: 36039589 PMC: 10930295. DOI: 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2022.210689.


The 10-Point Plan 2021: Updated Concepts for Improved Procedural Safety During Facial Filler Treatments.

Heydenrych I, De Boulle K, Kapoor K, Bertossi D Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2021; 14:779-814.

PMID: 34276222 PMC: 8279269. DOI: 10.2147/CCID.S315711.

References
1.
Verwey W, Shea C, Wright D . A cognitive framework for explaining serial processing and sequence execution strategies. Psychon Bull Rev. 2014; 22(1):54-77. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-014-0773-4. View

2.
Keller P . Mental imagery in music performance: underlying mechanisms and potential benefits. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2012; 1252:206-13. DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06439.x. View

3.
Annett M . A classification of hand preference by association analysis. Br J Psychol. 1970; 61(3):303-21. DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1970.tb01248.x. View

4.
de Kleine E, Van der Lubbe R . Decreased load on general motor preparation and visual-working memory while preparing familiar as compared to unfamiliar movement sequences. Brain Cogn. 2010; 75(2):126-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandc.2010.10.013. View

5.
Debarnot U, Sperduti M, Di Rienzo F, Guillot A . Experts bodies, experts minds: How physical and mental training shape the brain. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014; 8:280. PMC: 4019873. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00280. View